Metaphysical Subjectivism vs. Objectivism

I have a lot of wannabe-philosopher friends, and being a staunch objectivist (as opposed to Objectivism; I'm not a Randroid), I get in arguments all the time about it.

However, you bring up a good point - we're STUCK with our senses. And that's where I think that the debate comes up. Certainly, we both can witness the same thing and come up with different accounts - but there is clearly an underlying reality there.

Let's say that perceptions allow us to view objective reality, but that sometimes our perceptions can be a bit eschewed based on personal ideas or such.

I can't imagine anyone taking metaphysical subjectivity very seriously. As cool as it might sound, there isn't a whole lot of proof, and the method of mocking people who conceive of an objective reality only makes us less likely to take them seriously.

How ya doing, buddy?

Originally Posted by Metaconsciou§

Yup, it is impossible to completely adhere to metaphysical subjectivity, it's just too laughable. However, our enjoyment or "perception" of reality is subjective, because yeah, we are STUCK with our senses. We all are perceiving the SAME thing but we come away from the experience/event with different angles due to our position at the time and our socialized reality filters.

This is an advocation of an objective reality.

I hate it when people argue that because we have subjective tastes it's an argument for a subjective reality. Of COURSE we have subjective tastes; I am not the same as you. Of course, reality, however, exists independent of us both.

There's nowhere I can't reach.