主觀性與客觀性

[Daniel_Cheung]

在第４－７頁，作者Holmes指出有兩種主觀性與客觀性，然後說啟蒙思想給人的錯誤印象是認為形而上的客觀性metaphysical objectivity與知識論上的主觀性epistemological subjectivity是不可共存的，這誤解一直延至二十世紀末。不知各位是否認同這診斷？

[tkhwong2005]

在第４－７頁，作者Holmes指出有兩種主觀性與客觀性，然後說啟蒙思想給人的錯誤印象是認為形而上的客觀性metaphysical objectivity與知識論上的主觀性epistemological subjectivity是不可共存的，這誤解一直延至二十世紀末。不知各位是否認同這診斷？

Personally, I agree Holmes' diagnosis. At the same time, I can see a shift in post-enlightenment period:

I remembere when I learnt to write my essay in my English class, my teacher did not allow us to use "I" in my essay writing. We can only use "the author" to replace "I". When I learnt to write my essay in seminary, my professor encouraged us to use "I" instead of "the author".

In my reflection, During the period of enlightenment, truth is an objective impersonal truth that we cannot address them as my conviction. (That is why I cannot use "I" in my essay in my high school essay). However, during post-enlightenment period, truth becomes personal conviction that one or one's community embraced. (That is why I can use "I" in my seminary essay).

What do you think?

Tony

[Daniel_Cheung]

這是一個很有趣的觀察，我的寫文風格也經歷過類似的轉變。 :)

[Alan Leung]

I write "we" in my progress report, but my supervisor asked me to write "I" to stress that "I" am the one who carry out the experiments.....

[Panda]

在大學的時候, 曾經上一科類似叫'technical writing', 老師話, 寫科學論文一定要用passive, 例如: it is found that, it has been proved that, 而不是 we found that, I have proved that... 後來在研究階段, 見到大部分journal paper也是用被動式, 我也覺得這樣好像好一點, 但我的supervisor卻說用主動好一點. 於是我整份paper都是用被動句, 唯獨隨後被他加了幾句主動句進去... we remark that... etc. 想不到這也和主/客觀有關...