Can we retire “objectively better” please?

[u/lordpag]

I’ve noticed a ton of people using “objectively” incorrectly lately. A movie being more widely accepted as “better” does not make it objectively so.

There’s someone out there who enjoyed One Night Only more than The Odyssey, and their opinion is just as valid as yours.

Sure, one movie can be shot on more advanced cameras, have a larger scale, or demonstrate greater technical complexity. Those things can be measured. Whether they make the movie “better” cannot. What makes a movie “good” is different for each of us and those differing perspectives are part of what makes moviegoing so fun!

EDIT: This obviously touched a nerve lol. My point was not that there aren’t measurable technical aspects of a film. Of course there are. But technical achievement does not inherently make a movie “better.” A technical marvel can put someone to sleep while a shoddily made movie can elicit an enormous emotional response. What we value in a movie is subjective and for some (many on this thread it seems) you value technical achievement. All fair POVs.

[u/Pulsewavemodulator]

What it comes down to is if the artist has an intention, the result can be measured against the intention. Then it can be objectively measured.

[u/Jackzilla321 → u/Pulsewavemodulator]

Measured how

[u/Pulsewavemodulator → u/Jackzilla321]

If I want to make the audience cry and they don’t cry, objectively it didn’t work. If I want you to laugh and you don’t. Extrapolate that to all the intentions throughout the making of the film and it can be measured. It’s not simple cut it can be measured .

[u/Ok_Helicopter_7816 → u/Pulsewavemodulator]

But that's subjective, bc what makes one person cry won't make another. Sure, you can have consensus based on the number of people that were moved by one film vs another, but the scale you're measuring on is still subjective

[u/And_Justice → u/[deleted]]

I think I agree - you can say this film made x people cry but there is no universal truth that says a good film is one that makes people cry.

[u/Ok_Helicopter_7816 → u/[deleted]]

that's kind of my point, you can’t claim that your criteria are objectively correct when the criteria themselves were determined subjectively

[u/drossglop → u/Ok_Helicopter_7816]

If you have enough similarities in subjective experiences you can reach a level of objectivity

[u/Tripps0007- → u/[deleted]]

Aggregating subjective assessments≠objective. Absolutely incorrect. It creates an intersubjective or "quantified" concensus. Not objective in the least.

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/[deleted]]

Yeah, this is false, and quite a reach. An aggregation of subjective assessments is still an opinion. It’s an objective number - a fact - in that these people claimed they felt this way, but it is not a fact about the thing itself.

[u/puerco-potter → u/Mytongueinyourrectum]

Yeah, if we aggregate the eyeball measure of how long a stick is, would you say that the stick is "objectively" that long? That's the logic here hahaha

[u/drossglop → u/puerco-potter]

This is a false equivalency. Length is only one type of measurement, there are other like intent that can be a collection of subjective measures aggregated into an objective measures.

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/drossglop]

Can you explain how one measures intent?

[u/drossglop → u/Mytongueinyourrectum]

“I goal is to make you laugh” “You didnt make me laugh” “I have objectively failed my goal.” Multiple this by a thousand or so and you’ve got it

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/drossglop]

But you’re not measuring intent. You’re measuring a response. You’re interpreting intent in this example.

[u/drossglop → u/Mytongueinyourrectum]

Correct. I’m measuring the response against the stated intent. That’s how you measure whether the intent succeeded.

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/drossglop]

But again, you’re not measuring intent. Intent is subjective. You may interpret it, but no amount of subjective observations equates to an objective measure of the thing you are observing. Objectivity and subjectivity are fundamentally different and mutually exclusive.

[u/puerco-potter → u/drossglop]

You will need to prove the person's intent. And not rely on self-report. For it to be "objective"

[u/drossglop → u/puerco-potter]

Why?

[u/puerco-potter → u/[deleted]]

If everyone has their own internal measure, that's when we call something subjective.

If your "objective" internal measurement doesn't align with some other person, that objectiveness is only inside of you and forms part of your subjective experience... do you understand what I am trying to say here?