The Bridge From Subjectivity to Objectivity
How Kant and Husserl built the bridges
"The objectivity of the world is the transcendence of a multiplicity of monads harmoniously intertwined in their experiences." - Husserl, Cartesian Meditations, §55
Can beauty, which is individually experienced, possess universal validity? Consider two individuals witnessing a sunset from the same location; they are likely to concur that it is "very beautiful," even though their personal experiences remain unknown to us. Now, if they were observing a painting, would the probability of agreement be identical? Perhaps not.
How can subjective elements such as aesthetic judgment or personal knowledge attain objectivity The quest for objectivity has long been a central pursuit in philosophy. How can we, as individuals with unique experiences and perspectives, arrive at knowledge that transcends our subjectivity and holds true for everyone? Ultimately, the question is, what does objective truth signify?
Immanuel Kant believed that our experience of beauty, while rooted in personal feeling, possesses a curious universality. We feel pleasure or displeasure when encountering something beautiful, a subjective response, yet we instinctively expect others to share our sentiment. Kant argues this is possible because we all possess a shared capacity for reason – a "universal subjectivity" of taste.
This notion of a shared rationality might seem puzzling at first. To understand it, we need to delve into Kant's complex philosophical system known as transcendental idealism. Kant recognized that our experiences are inherently subjective, filtered through our individual perspectives. However, he also believed that objective knowledge is achievable. He proposed that our minds actively shape our experiences, not passively absorbing them, using innate mental structures he called "categories of understanding" and "forms of intuition."
These structures, Kant argued, are universal, built into the very fabric of human reason. Because we all share this fundamental cognitive architecture, we can expect a degree of shared experience and understanding. This shared capacity for reason is what allows us to engage in meaningful conversations, apply universal moral principles, and strive for objectivity in our understanding of the world. It also explains why we can expect others to share our judgments of beauty.
Essentially, Kant resolves the puzzle of objectivity by proposing these innate structures. However, it's important to note that Kant's ideas have been the subject of much debate and criticism throughout history.
Shifting our focus to Edmund Husserl, the founder of phenomenology, we encounter a different perspective on the enduring philosophical question of objective knowledge and its relationship to subjective experience. Husserl's concept of "ideal meaning" offers a unique solution, bridging the gap between the personal realm of individual consciousness and the shared world of objective truth.
At the heart of this concept lies the idea that our conscious acts possess an abstract, universal content – an "ideal meaning" – that remains consistent across various instances of thinking about the same thing. This consistency is crucial for understanding how objective knowledge emerges. When multiple individuals direct their consciousness towards the same object or concept, they access this same ideal meaning, even if their subjective experiences and personal associations differ.
Imagine, for example, contemplating a triangle. Regardless of our individual mental images or past experiences with triangles, we all grasp the same core meaning: a closed figure with three straight sides. This shared understanding, rooted in the ideal meaning of "triangle," allows for intersubjective agreement and lays the foundation for objective knowledge.
Crucially, these ideal meanings are not bound to any specific physical manifestation or individual's mental state. They exist in a realm transcending individual subjectivity, yet remain accessible to all conscious beings. This transcendent yet accessible nature forms a bridge between subjective experience and objective reality.
Husserl's framework elegantly explains how our subjective experiences can converge on objective truths. Our individual conscious acts, what Husserl terms "noetic" acts, are directed towards these ideal meanings (part of the "noema"), which remain constant across diverse subjective experiences. This constancy paves the way for objective knowledge that transcends individual perspectives.
Furthermore, these ideal meanings contribute to the "horizons" of our experience, a background of potential meanings that shapes and contextualizes any given experience. These horizons provide a structure within which our subjective experiences can align with objective reality.
This concept of shared horizons hints at a deeper layer in Husserl's thought: intersubjectivity. Husserl recognized that our consciousness is not isolated but fundamentally intertwined with the consciousness of others. We experience the world not just as individuals but as members of a shared community of minds. This intersubjective dimension is crucial for the development of language, culture, and shared understanding. Through interactions with others, we confirm and refine our grasp of ideal meanings, contributing to a shared world of objective knowledge.
In essence, Husserl's concept of ideal meaning, interwoven with his notion of intersubjectivity, provides a compelling solution to the challenge of reconciling subjective consciousness with objective reality. It illuminates how we can think about the same things, communicate effectively, and build a shared understanding of the world. By offering a common ground accessible to all consciousnesses yet independent of any particular one, ideal meanings create the possibility for objective knowledge rooted in, yet transcending, our individual experiences.
Two prominent philosophers, Kant and Husserl, have tackled the challenge of attaining objectivity. Kant proposed the concept of innate structures, while Husserl offered the notion of ideal meanings to bridge the gap from subjectivity to objectivity. Nonetheless, both theories encounter challenges: they are intricate and their foundational premises invite scrutiny. Since Kant's time, the concept of innate structures has undergone significant evolution, and Husserl's ideas have faced criticism for potential idealism and discrepancies with his earlier works.
In the comparison of innate structures and ideal meanings:
Innate structures and categories are static, molding our perception of the world.
Ideal meanings are dynamic, arising from the intersubjective sphere of collective comprehension. The world is "constituted" through our purposeful actions, steered by ideal meanings.
The transition to objectivity is also pertinent for Large Language Models (LLMs), as they are trained on text that conveys human knowledge. They may eventually be endowed with agency to interact directly with the world.