It’s day 20 of the rewrites. It includes the previous day’s entry.
Everything that can “see” is a subject. To imagine objectivity is to imagine the gaze of an absolute non-participating third-party. The third party must not have a self, otherwise it would be another subject. But when we ascribe to objects that can’t see a point of view, it still doesn’t have a point of view. We only imagine the point of view and it is still ours.
Indeed one could argue that objectivity exists in the layer of the inter-subject. But it only exists there in the agreement between persons, not elsewhere, as it’s often claimed to be. In practice, accepting the label of objectivity is deferring to the power of the majority. It’s not quite understood as that, so using the label is often disingenuous.
Exactly because subjects could hide behind objectivity, it is very useful. It’s like having a convenient extension to one’s limited point-of-view. To admit to its illusory nature is to confront the implications of existing as a self. That is not comfortable. Always disavowing claims to objectivity might be preferable, but impossible because of this. At least, one could always be wary of those who claim authority by invoking the power of its usefulness.
No adverbs. No passive voice. All very readable. And it still does not make sense. Enough for today.