Objective quality in purely subjective things

[Yeekim]

Nope. I never let other people decide for me whether something is good or not. I'm not saying the site isn't interesting, but it's not something I'd use to decide if a show or movie is good.

"For me (you)" is the important qualifier here.

Subjective things (like art) can be objectively rated according to how many people like or dislike them. That is an objective metric, which is why it is so widely used.

Does not mean you need to like what the majority likes.

 

[Valka D'Ur]

"For me (you)" is the important qualifier here.

Subjective things (like art) can be objectively rated according to how many people like or dislike them. That is an objective metric, which is why it is so widely used.

Does not mean you need to like what the majority likes.

All that does is count the number of people who like it.

It still doesn't provide a reason for saying something is objectively good.

 

[Yeekim]

All that does is count the number of people who like it.

It still doesn't provide a reason for saying something is objectively good.

That depends on the definition of "good". From utilitarian point of view, I think the number of people who like something would be the measure of its "goodness".

 

[Valka D'Ur]

That depends on the definition of "good". From utilitarian point of view, I think the number of people who like something would be the measure of its "goodness".

So if you count the billions of people who smoke, that means cigarettes/cigars are 'good'?

 

[Narz]

So if you count the billions of people who smoke, that means cigarettes/cigars are 'good'?

Nicotine increases dopamine so in the moment it's good, even if in the long run it kills you, like sugar but yuckier smelling

 

[Kyriakos]

"For me (you)" is the important qualifier here.

Subjective things (like art) can be objectively rated according to how many people like or dislike them. That is an objective metric, which is why it is so widely used.

Does not mean you need to like what the majority likes.

Interesting that in your suggestion, something subjective becomes objectively measured on account of its popularity. In another model (alluded to by myself too) it's not that the subjective became objective by metrics that are entirely external to it (eg number of people who like it), but that the number of people of who like it implies techniques/other traits that themselves bestow to the original object a measure of inherent objective worth, which then (while depleted or altered in ways) ultimately cause it to have admirers.
I'd say that the degree of subjectivity can wildly vary. To take it to an extreme, if you thought that the term for death in greek was actually the term for life in greek, you'd likely agree that "life" (actually death) is good. Likewise for projecting a meaning to works of art, when that projection is fiercely personal (goes without saying that in practice it is less personal, but still able to dictate your view). In the end, however, it is true that the measure of art is its audience, but some ideal audience that includes all possible in reality variations (again easier to see using the extreme: the homeric epics in ancient greek wouldn't likely be picked up by people who don't read greek). Given time, the work can reach a decent/critical number of observers, thus satisfy this criterion.

As for what the popularity may be down to, again it's more direct to examine a visual-based example. Various teen tv series/movies were popular despite having very simple plots: they already included good looking teens, which are something the audience wants. Itself this is a decision by the "artist", just of a different type than calculations about a memorable reveal etc. The artist there doesn't even need to create the popular aspect; they just hire it and it is meant to be used by and large "as is", without having to assemble it like with words and passages forming a scheme in literature.

 

[Farm Boy]

Cigarettes helped with baseline depression. They increased bureaucratic efficiency with constant voluntary impromptu cross-departmental smoke break cooperation sessions everywhere I worked(totally noticeable loss when organizations banned on-campus smoking too(always amusing to watch your salaried people conference in while your hourly support staff are hiding in their cars on their breaks).

In a certain sense, I'm definitely going to die, it's whether or not the cigarettes provide or extract more joy getting there. It's not super simple. How handy of society to add bankrupting you with taxes in order to insert harm into the equation that isn't linked to the cigarette, rather being harm directly caused you by your neighbors, but with the excuse that it's the cigarette. They're helping(themselves).

 

[amadeus]

Subjective things (like art) can be objectively rated according to how many people like or dislike them. That is an objective metric, which is why it is so widely used.

It is a metric, but is it objective?

I think of something like a “like” is hard to add a quality to: if I like something, it doesn’t come at the exclusion of something else, so there’s no shortage of likes that I can give.

If a movie studio could truly harness this, it would find a way to determine who would get the most enjoyment out of a movie, then charge cinemagoers accordingly based on what they would pay. I guess you could already do this by auctioning off movie tickets, but this would be time-consuming and certainly more expensive than the current flat rates to which we are all bound.

You can measure something like this and ask how many people liked something—but what does it mean?

 

[EvaDK]

As soon as a statement becomes informed or shaped by your or someone else's opinions, feelings, beliefs etc., it becomes subjective.

An objective statement can be backed up by facts, evidence or measurements that are not derived from subjective opinions no matter how well argued they are.

 

[Kyriakos]

The issue is that in art the facts are axioms unknown to both the person creating and their audience.
It'd be like trying to prove a math statement without being given any statements in the system being true, but being told that if your mark is high it implies some tie to the unknown true statements.

 

[Yeekim]

So if you count the billions of people who smoke, that means cigarettes/cigars are 'good'?

Well... I should have clarified that by "something" I meant some type of art.
I was also discounting negative side-effects for simplicity's sake, although a proper utilitarian approach should certainly account for those as well.
This, however, gets complex... we might easily come to conclusion that "good" art is "bad", because people would get drawn to it to the exclusion of other, more important stuff. Like binging a series while neglecting their duties, health and personal hygiene...

 

[Kyriakos]

Or you could notice that externally defining something implies the something being taken as a package, therefore factoring the packaging standard.

 

[Hygro]

The issue is that in art the facts are axioms unknown to both the person creating and their audience.
It'd be like trying to prove a math statement without being given any statements in the system being true, but being told that if your mark is high it implies some tie to the unknown true statements.

Even our language makes it difficult to talk about it without sounding silly. But you've done a good job getting at it.

It's all mediated subjectively, its known purpose is subjective, it reflects all inputs subjective. And yet, the highest energy, calmest, receptive, full open sensory experience combined with the knowledge and context needed to "get" it is how this ... thing is closest to known. Or at least recognized. Or at least sensed. Or even just believed to be sensed but it comes clearest when you're the most honest and true, which is a sign.

 

[Farm Boy]

People have frequency ranges in which they tend to resonate? Do you see it more as a tolerance or a sweet spot? Before it becomes something else or noise?

 

[Hygro]

Literal hertz or metaphorically?

 

[Farm Boy]

Yes

Art figures entropy too.

 

[Kyriakos]

Even our language makes it difficult to talk about it without sounding silly. But you've done a good job getting at it.

It's all mediated subjectively, its known purpose is subjective, it reflects all inputs subjective. And yet, the highest energy, calmest, receptive, full open sensory experience combined with the knowledge and context needed to "get" it is how this ... thing is closest to known. Or at least recognized. Or at least sensed. Or even just believed to be sensed but it comes clearest when you're the most honest and true, which is a sign.

But if it was just about one observer, it would fall - you know for a fact that you may find x work of art great at some point, then not so great later on (regardless of no mental improvement/decline).
Which is why it has to be about an adequate number of observers, so that the invisible net cast keeps working in the ways it had to work. Those ways themselves are not of the same type either. In effect, the work of art is not just observed but turns you into it so that you observe yourself at that tangent.

PS, regarding the frequency metaphor: I agree with it, but it's a part and not the whole. Imagine a bridge pulsating (and maybe also collapsing) by an army that marched on it to its frequency. We still need to add that in this metaphor the bridge should have to be aware of armies and their marches, since it's extremely rare for observers of art to never have previously observed a result of art on them. You can only be unaware of needles once, regardless of the needles being blunt or not there is added expectation

 

[Narz]

In a certain sense, I'm definitely going to die, it's whether or not the cigarettes provide or extract more joy getting there. It's not super simple.

I wouldn't equate joy with cigarettes, smokers are a pretty morose lot generally and when you're dying painfully over half a decade or more there's definitely not much joy, I think the joyousness of self-destruction is overrated & promoted by a culture of addiction & escapism

 

[Farm Boy]

Morose? At that point in your post, we've diverged into alternate realities. Addressing anything else before clearing this would probably be a waste of time. I'd be out yelling in the back 40 and you'd be lecturing somebody on Mars.

And just to spite my face after typing that, it's weird to assume the dying slowly over half a decade isn't actually a goal, regardless of cigarettes. I bet it is. People would call it objective, to measure in years, rather than subjective.

 

[Narz]

Morose? At that point in your post, we've diverged into alternate realities.

Just my experience with smokers.

Addressing anything else before clearing this would probably be a waste of time. I'd be out yelling in the back 40 and you'd be lecturing somebody on Mars.

The back 40? Mars?

And just to spite my face after typing that, it's weird to assume the dying slowly over half a decade isn't actually a goal, regardless of cigarettes.

You missed the word painfully, I don't think anyway wants a long, painful death, shoot I don't even like the aches & pains of reasonable functional middle-age existence, being infirm, miserable & cranky every single day for my final years, not enjoying life & a physical & emotional burden for all around me sounds like hell, I'd be ringing Dr K.