Subjective view by the left eye of the Austrian-Czech physicist and philosopher Ernst Mach (1838-1916). In this self-portrait (wood engraving 1886 from drawing 1870, Prague) the author is still holding the drawing pencil in his right hand.

The benefits of objectivity
Let's talk basics: The key issue of being human is the conflict between me and them or, on a larger scale, between us and them. All quarrel in the world  starts with two children in the sandbox trying to get hold of the same shovel. Two immature egos try to get what they want at the expense of the other. With some luck they will realize that playing together is more rewarding than playing alone.
Luck alone is no reliable companion. In a harmless setting (sandbox) we may succeed after minor drawbacks with trial and error. In more serious situations, it is better not to depend on luck. It is better to exercise foresight and to build on experience. Personal conflicts have the unpleasant tendency to invite reciprocal projections of suspected negative motivation. Some of these insinuations, that rarely are spoken out frankly, may even contain a grain of truth.
Most personal conflicts, that may involve individuals, groups or even whole societies, start as apparently harmless imagination in the fantasy of the confronting parties. "I believe that..." or "I would not be surprised if..." are the entry ports for rumour and suspicion. It is likely that humans are genetically pre-disposed to seek and to get into personal confrontation with each other. But 'pre-disposed' does not mean that it always has to be so.
Humans have developed culture and tradition. In our behavior, we are not obliged to follow our genes. Humans do learn. They can obey rules. Humans often refuse to obey other humans, especially if they do not trust them.  But rules are no persons. They have no interest on their side. They are neutral, aren't they?
Well, at least good rules should be neutral and not represent the sinister will of Gessler to greet his hat. No one in particular makes them. They are the never final product of never ending debates (peaceful ones). That's one of the indispensable pillars of democracy. These agreed-upon rules pave the way from all too short-sighted subjective interest to general benefit.
We may confront a personal adversary, who interferes with our plans and expectations, with all our might and strength and hatred, but we at the same time can respect rules that have been made by all of us for all of us. It may even be our pleasure to do so.
A minor source of doubt may turn up from the very fact that fair rules are made by all of us. Since we all are human, we can err. Therefore, no rule can be perfect. In addition, our view of the world and of ourselves will change slightly from generation to generation. Also the collection of rules will need occasional adjustment.
Peaceful resolution of conflict takes into consideration the position of both parties. At the end, the conflict is settled not by the two subjects confronting each other, but on the basis of objective facts by a third party. Thus, the adversaries surrender, to some extent, their freedom to a verdict not motivated by a subjective interest, but by the careful observation of a compendium of directives known in advance to all.
By this change in point of view, the matters of the case lose their personal flavour; they are reduced from the subjective to the objective level. The combattants may even be left with the impression: It was not up to me to win or to lose the fight, it was rather a matter of fact, not a matter of guilt or innocence.
4/24 <         MB 5/24         > 6/24
Freedom and Society
see also: Communication of millions? (7/06)
hashiwokakero or: Why do we care? (2/17)
How to weigh and count the mind? (4/05)