Neither Subjective Nor Objective
By Jack Don McLovin - Multidiscplinarian -- Jack Has Been writing pages a day for the past 10 years under varying anonymous accounts, always drifting from place to place trying to gain popularity in a group, and start again, and repeat.
When looking at the subjective and objective, the only merits to which they stand is by the objective, the subjective achieves nothing but pure appreciation in limitless quantities in given individuals and so by devalues themselves in the short term, but the objective fixes all objects that can be broken, and most of it usually still somewhat is broken.
But these two are proscropic initiatives, rather the anti or retro scropic initiatives, so when we look at objective and subjective and wonder why nothing at all fits purely in just one of the boxes, but that consciousness transforms ideas of what it might be like to look at it in one of those ways or the other, because that's all it can seem to do, a characteristic or a function.
There's also the surjective transjective postjective and prejectives, everything surrounding the objective and subjective makes it seem like the way we have it now is that subjective is submissive to the objective and the objective obeys the rules of the object. But there's a lot more to it.
It's like smelling a flower and objectively saying what chemical causes this, well subjectively this can make you feel a type of way, the two come together and are never separate. Nothing is neither one nor the other, everything is always both and neither, because it's outside of that system of derogation as to whether something is evidentiary and fact-based or just whimsical and in the air dependent on emotions and the day to day dreams of the individual.
But ultimately we can say that objective facts remain certain, while subjective facts are in the wind, unless of course your subjection is a certainty, or the objective is of the wind.
