Predispositions/Values/Priorities have observable phenomena.
Each one of us experiences them directly. Thus, they exist within our internal environment - the mind.
Due to this, they meet the criteria of the latter definition.
However, whilst predispositions are objective in the latter sense, they do not meet the criteria of the prior definition of objectivity.
Our minds easily create a feedback loop. We’re more likely to recognize patterns in the present that conform or are related to our stored interpretations of the past. Thus, prior experience creates a filter by which new information is sifted and collected.
[Discussed in Joy, Pain & Influence]
This feedback loop has observable phenomena, thus is objective in the latter sense, but not the prior sense.
People confuse these two definitions of objectivity and their implications.
Whilst something can be based on observable phenomenon, it doesn’t make it uninfluenced by personal bias. If people don’t recognize their bias, and another accuses them of being bias, they’ll point to all the patterns they’ve seen in the world and claim, ‘I’m objective. It’s you who’s bias!’.
Bias is what differentiates the living from the dead. As we’re all living beings, it comes with the territory that we’re bias. It can’t be escaped, except with death or extreme damage, and not a moment sooner.
Conventional wisdom tells us, bias makes us susceptible to error in judgement. Thus, we devised strategies to minimize bias in our attention to details, and methods to test the integrity of any conclusion drawn from said details.
Objectivity in the prior sense relies on how equally you weight details in their right to attention.
Correlation does not imply causation.
