Whenever someone presents an understanding and a creative response to a situation, other less creative - but more critical individuals - attempt to devalue a person's contribution to change, by stating, and often quite angrily - that what was done is "subjective" and hence not valuable. Come one! That just shows that the critic attempts to box creative, original thought into the "disarming box" of "objectivity".
A crucial ingredient of objectivity is "Observation". This is the cornerstone of "objectivity" yet it is "flawed" by subjectivity. No human being has the capacity to be objective, because he/she does not have the capacity to ignore the facts that:
1. His body occupies a specific space and time that is not shared by anyone else
2. His perceptions of the mere physical dimensions of any observed facet of life is determined by the angle and quality of tools and medium he/she personally employs to observe - which is uniquely him/her and hence totally subjective
3. The perceptions, opinions and views of any individual is unique in that his/her experience of life is not identical to another and hence will subjectively influence any interpretation or conclusion he/she arrives at.
The above realities already puts a damper on the consistent demotivation non-creative people employ to discourage people who presents work without referencing other people. As long as a person does not quote verbatim, he/she has the right to present his/her understanding of any phenomena.
Courtesy is the cornerstone of true communication. When someone creates any piece of work/ or gives an opinion, it i courteous to listen, read or evaluate what has been presented. To shoot it down because you believe in flawed "objectivity" is discourteous. This s plain rudeness. It immediately tells the creative presenter that what he/she has done is not worth looking at or considering, because it does not following the human invented criteria of objectivity. Remember courtesy has created more social bonding - the reality of human existence - that what objectivity can ever imagine to create. Actually "objectivity" more readily creates disorientation, because it creates arguments - which is the purpose of the creation of the principles of objectivity - the need to create space for new "research" which forces scholars to register at institutions owned by the Capitalistic investors - who sees learning as a product for sale - marginalizing all poor people. "Objectivity" seems to keep academia in a loop of dependence to ensure a continuous indebtedness to fees- feeding the interest-related economies. "Objectivity" encouraged by academia, is a ploy to manipulate information of others, quote them out of context to promote a subjective aim, which often mystifies simple truths in order to confuse the masses. If objectivity in research was so powerful, how is it that the financial markets crashed and the economists are not even able to identify what really caused the crash. They are not able to, because the capitalist minds are yet incapable of wrapping around interest-free financing policies. The courtesy of caring for others has diminished through the insistence of cold, antisocial "objectivity" and the rejection of warm, sociable, creative subjectivity and the respect for creative individuals.
Faint Signs of the Demise of Objectivity
History, often written with "objectivity" was found to be politically biased and socially discriminatory. The acceptance of Oral History is a sign of the importance of the individual subjectivity to arrive at truths of life. When a professor can write a research article call "Black Education in Transition". supporting Apartheid policies using "verified data" then all "research" articles, with supportive data and analysis, become suspect. When another university lecturer advises his student that it is not about reading the whole text, it is just about quoting from text and referencing it, then the academia itself is questioned.
Purpose for the insistence of Objectivity
"Objectivity" in essence is an attempt to neutralize spirituality. Spirituality is feared by the capitalists, because it has the potential to free the mind from market enslavement. Markets are supported by research, which "convinces" the uninformed mind of the validity of a product's "effectiveness, based on research" only to find later that other research negates previous findings. This proves that objectivity is often determined by available technology and such technology determines the conditions of objective "truths". Faith on the other hand has stability and develops inner confidence, while objectivity develops external, tangible slavery to the material.