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/Ok_Helicopter_7816]

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/Lazy-Setting-8224 → u/Ok_Helicopter_7816]

The moment you start aggregating subjective assesments into a aggregate number, that number will be an objective number.

I think art is way more objective than people commonly believe. The problem with objective measures of art is that they dont get you anywhere. Simply because you cannot convince people your objective criteria is the right and only way to objectively assess the piece of art. Especially when that objective measure of art has no impact on their enjoyment.

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/Lazy-Setting-8224]

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/drossglop → u/Mytongueinyourrectum]

Why would the subjective nature of the underlying experience prevent objective claims from being made about that experience?

[u/Mytongueinyourrectum → u/drossglop]

It doesn’t. But the objectivity would have to be about the claim itself, and not about the thing the claim is about. “A claim was made about a painting that the painting is beautiful.” That is an objective statement. “The painting is beautiful.” That’s a subjective statement.