Objectivity vs. Subjectivity

There seems to be some false notions floating around the type community that these two terms mean the difference between something that is true, verified and trusted versus something that is false, biased, and untrustworthy. There is a lot of extra meanings and assumptions being piled onto these terms that are not part of their root meaning. So, let’s dig into what these terms actually mean and how that relates back to the cognitive functions.

Objective

Definition:
1. expressing or dealing with facts or conditions as perceived without distortion by personal feelings, prejudices, or interpretations
2. of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind

Most of the confusion about objectivity when it comes to cognitive functions is the result of the first definition listed. The extraverted cognitive functions (Fe, Te, Ne, Se) are considered to be objective, but definition number one is the incorrect one to use in relation to these functions. Objectivity in the cognitive function sense means, quite literally, object-oriented, or as the definition above says “having reality independent of the mind.”

Carl Jung says this: “Now, when orientation by the object predominates in such a way that decisions and actions are determined not by subjective views but by objective conditions, we speak of an extraverted attitude.”

Essentially, Jung explains that extraverted functions are objective in the sense that they are oriented to external conditions, which makes them ‘objective.’ It is their focus on objects outside of themselves that makes them this way. They focus on those things outlined in definition number two. It does not mean that a person leading with one of these functions will be less prone to having biased opinions, but rather that those biased opinions will be based upon and centered around external objects. They are interested in those things. They don’t embody those things.

Now, obviously, we are all affected by data outside of ourselves. To exist purely in the mind would be an extremely unhealthy existence. However, everyone reacts to outside data differently, which is a major thing that Jung points out. Ultimately, the person that habitually adapts themselves to external conditions is objective or extraverted, while the person that holds subjective views above the external is subjective or introverted. Objective people will always looked externally for deciding factors, viewing absolutes as being outside of themselves rather than inside.

“If a man thinks, feels, acts, and actually lives in a way that is directly correlated with the objective conditions and their demands, he is extraverted.” – Carl Jung

Subjective

Definition:
1. lacking in reality or substance
2. relating to or being experience or knowledge as conditioned by personal mental characteristics or states
3. arising out of or identified by means of one’s perception of one’s own states and processes

Again, most of the confusion when it comes to the introverted cognitive functions is the first definition. The first definition was not the intended one when it comes to the introverted (subjective) functions.

“…the introvert is distinguished from the extravert by the fact that he does not, like the latter, orient himself by the object and by objective data, but rather subjective factors.” – Carl Jung

Jung explains the introverted functions as being ‘subject’ oriented hence ‘subjective.’ These functions are focused on the subject (the subject being yourself) and, by extension, the meanings are personal. The meaning of subjective in this context falls more in line with definition numbers two and three. Leading with a subjective function will not make the person any more or less biased than someone who leads with an objective one, but their primary focus will be on things that have been internalized so it will be harder for anyone else to see what is being focused on.

“The predominance of the subjective factor in consciousness naturally involves a devaluation of the object. The object is not given the importance that belongs to it by right. Just as it plays too great a role in the extraverted attitude, it has too little meaning for the introvert.” – Carl Jung

The introverted type is inherently less adaptable, because they are orienting themselves to what is internal, and subjective. They are not readily adapting themselves to external, objective conditions. They hold subjective views above all. There is this completely invalid stereotypes that thinkers are inherently more objective than feelers, since being a feeler must mean that your logic is colored by emotions, but that is a misconception. Ti users especially like to claim objectivity, but that is false. In the typology sense, Ti is subjective because Ti logic isn’t naturally oriented to external data. Fe and Te are more “objective” than Fi and Ti. Obviously, every one has two extraverted functions, one perceiving and one judging, so they should be able to use those to ground them to the external world. However, if you start sticking functions in their own personal little bubbles, Ti cannot be objective by itself in any sense of the word. Neither can any of the functions, introverted or extraverted.

Both Are Important

The extraverted functions can possess their own form of bias, making them objective in the typology sense but not objective in the classic sense. While the introverted functions will lose touch with reality, the extraverted functions may cherry pick reality to support very specific stances, or may fall prey to group think. If everyone else believes it, it must be true. That would be orienting one’s self to the object, making them “objective” in one sense but not in another.

Balance must be achieved in one’s life between the objective and the subjective. As I mentioned earlier with the Ti user, subjective viewpoints that fail to appropriately take into account the external will be extremely flawed. However, it is also flawed to be purely oriented to the object without any connection to the subject.

“But what is the subject? The subject is man himself – we are the subject. Only a sick mind could forget that cognition must have a subject, and that there is no knowledge whatsoever and therefore no world at all unless ‘I know’ has been said, though with this statement one has already expressed the subjective limitation of knowledge.” – Carl Jung

True objectivity will combine both objective observations with subjective reasoning. To lose touch with the subject or one’s self is a mistake, but to be fully submerged within self is equally bad. Without a connection to self, one cannot remain resolute in their own perception, or values, or possess intelligence. Subjectivity provides context to the objective. Everyone views the objective through the context of experience, and without subjective context, everything loses meaning. But, without connection to the external, those perceptions will not be able to stay connected to reality and ever-changing circumstances.

“For this reason its value is also merely relative. That is to say, the excessive development of the introverted standpoint does not lead to a better and sounder use of the subjective factor, but rather to an artificial subjectivizing of consciousness… This is then counterbalanced by a de-subjectivization which takes the form of an exaggerated extraverted attitude.” – Carl Jung

In summary…

One major downfall of personality theory and it’s enthusiasts is the tendency latch onto terms and attempt to apply them too broadly, too narrowly, or generally out of context. That’s why we feel it is so important to define the commonly used terms within typology, so that everyone can be reminded about what is actually being said. We are all at risk of failing to be objective in the classic sense, whether thinkers, feelers, sensors or intuitives. However, in the typology sense (and the more literal sense), some people are inherently more objective than others, but that is neither bad nor good – it is neutral. We need the subjective, and we need the objective to be both balanced and healthy.