Subjectivity versus Objectivity

Our view of the world itself looks different to us, as individuals, when viewed through the subjective lens of God, instead of looking at life through the objective lens of human perception. It’s a gradual process to learn to look this way, but it slowly results in improved views of what is perceived, and hence, a better experience and a more inspiring interpretation of our surroundings.  In the subjective view, all is harmonious because being is sensed through the perfect Mind of God. In this outlook, man’s perfection as the spiritual image and likeness of God is always first and foremost in thought, and the truth of the presentation of the human senses is always in question. It is called subjective because this view which sees everything from within the infinite realm of Spirit. It sees God from within ourselves, and not as being something “out there”. The only subjects that are to be accepted into this view of reality are other ideas that come from the same perfect source, God, from within our divine consciousness. The subjective viewer constantly analyzes what comes through thought, and evaluates if it has place in the consciousness he wants to maintain, and then rejects what does not belong.  The subjective view is God’s view.

In the objective human view, that which most have learned from childhood, we understand what we see through a filter of thought which insists upon separation and conflict. It is called an objective view because the viewer believes himself to be the subject of outside forces. The outside forces, though, are only a product of his own perception – and have no stand alone merit of their own. The nature of the human mind is that is sees what it believes as certainly as it believes what it sees. Minds which expect to see others as separate from themselves, and in conflict, experience exactly what they expect to experience – they see what they believe. In other words, we think the world is messed up. Therefore it appears as messed up. We expect people to be selfish. Therefore they appear in our minds as selfish. We expect people to attack us. Therefore, we experience their attacks.

It was pointed out to me that the use of the words subjective and objective, as I use them, appear to some to be used in a sense opposite from convention.  To clarify, in this context, subjectivity, the personal, is GOD‘s view, the view of the one and only divine Ego, and not the view  of the mortal and personal.  Objectivity refers to things outside of our personal self – things that are detected through the human senses.  Objective things appear to be in a framework outside of ourselves.

There are two senses through which we can look at things, the true divine sense, and the false mortal sense. Within the human mind, both realms seem to be present. We are truly spiritual beings and our eternal realm of reality is in infinite Spirit. We are trained to think in the mortal terms and to believe and expect that our realm is in matter. The mortal way of thinking grossly distorts the real and divine picture. The result is human experience. The less we think materially, the more our human experience better approximates spiritual reality and perfection.

In the absolute sense, which is an awareness from the subjective state of divine consciousness, things just ARE as they are perceived, because, seen through the lens of God, they are perceived perfectly.

Seen through the human lens, things are only what the human mind preconceives them to be – perhaps correct, perhaps incorrect, depending upon the expectation and belief of the human thinker. Armed with an awareness of what constitutes the divine and what constitutes the human, one can look at life through the thought lens of the divine rather than through the lens of the human mind, and so sort out what is real and what is the product of false human thought by comparison of the two. When this is done well, the natural harmony in experience comes to light. I touch on this in the article about healing through correlation of the divine and the human.

The human and objective sense in effect counterfeits the divine view. The real and spiritual is still indicated and present within the human experience, but presented in a humanized illustration that misrepresents reality. This is due to its imitation of the infinite nature of the divine. This finite and distorted counterfeit of the divine Mind is called the human mind. From the human mind view, each human mind interprets itself to exist in its own independent realm, called a human life. On the contrary, in the divine realm, each individual actually exists in unity with every other idea within the consciousness of God. Mankind is the sum total of God’s ideas within this one consciousness. God IS one consciousness. Spiritual man being His image and likeness, spiritual man is also of one consciousness, the divine. The nature of God being infinite and omnipotent, there is no room for the false mortal view to have validity except in an erroneous sense.

Humans believe themselves to have many consciousnesses, as if they were each their own self controlling gods. Human life is a sort of a finite approximation of the divine consciousness, appearing to be manifested as many different independent minds. Consciousness seen from this twisted perspective forces itself into an objective view. it must see everything outside of itself, for it has the conviction that everything it deals with exists outside of itself rather than coming from within. The result of this construct of thought is an apparent universe that seems to present people with separate embodiments and separate minds. This is totally contrary to God’s subjective view of His universe of being all inclusive and infinite in scope.

Share

4 Comments

Filed under Christian Science

4 comments on “Subjectivity versus Objectivity

  1. As a medical nurse who only in the past year really started studying Christian Science I have to say your article left me puzzled at first. The is because I have been a medical nurse for over 20 years and it is ingrained into me, only to assess the objective measurable signs: i.e. Vital signs, o2 sats, labwork, test results. Use them rather than subjective data because that is unreliable, may change and open to interpretation. I am learning quickly that what I see is not how it be so to speak and that trusting in lord often times means denying what is seems real from a material physical stand point. What a change.

    • , “what is true for you is not true for me,” is iilmpcitly accepting a form of idealism.I believe that there are many others who unknowingly subscribe to idealist premises.

      • “What is true for you is not true for me” in fact is accepting a form of relative objective reasoning – the complete opposite of the subjective reasoning described in the post. A true idealist must begin with a premise that there exists ONLY ONE absolute truth. Again, there is only ONE truth. Not a truth for me and a truth for you, and a truth for him. True is true. False is False. 2 +2 =4 is absolute. If someones else is convinced the sum is 5, it can only be falsely true in his imagined relative objective reality, which is in fact no reality at all. That is the starting point of the subjective point of view – ONE absolute truth equals reality. The idealist is aiming to reach the absolute – rejecting the concept that realities are relative, unless of course they are imagined realities. To some idealism seems to include a presumption of impossibility. I suggest that impossibility lies only in the false perception of maintaining relative points of view.

  2. Last week I visited a family I had often visited. The only thing different this time was my thought. I let go of the critical way I had perceived this family and all I experienced was love for them. I saw the positive that has always been there but my thinking in the past visits was negative. It was an experience that showed me that God is always expressing Himself in goodness and that it all that is real.Yesterday I was in a crowd too and began to think of all there as God’s children even though in this group I have been critical also.
    Stirling, I believe your article and find that when I let go of Mary’s ego, wonderful heaven like expressions of God do appear. This is awe inspiring to me. Thank you so for this article and thanks to my friend Sue Pruitt for drawing my attention to it.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*

HTML tags are not allowed.