Bellue

“To understand something you need to rely on your own experience and culture. Does this mean that it is impossible to have objective knowledge?”

We grow and learn through our failures, accomplishments, or, in an overall term, experience. Our understanding and views of things we learn through experience are affected by our cultural origin. Therefore, it is only natural for individuals to understand her surroundings based on her experience and culture. However, as subjective as much of the knowledge that we obtain from subjective factors is, it is simply impossible for us to NOT have objective knowledge. When looking at the mechanism behind different ways of knowing based on culture and experience, we try looking for reasons as to why we homo sapiens, born with same anatomical functions, think differently. However, we tend to overlook the fact that our reasoning topics, such as our cultural differences and why the physical world works the way it works, the action itself, is what allows us to have objective knowledge. In the areas of knowledge, arts, considered the most “subjective” due to endless creative possibilities, and mathematics, considered the most “objective” subject due to concepts accepted by society only after sufficient proof is given, can be understood from experience and culture. This essay will link subjective objective knowledge to subjective methods to objective knowledge by reasoning out how the two extreme subject areas are intertwined in terms of the mechanism behind the ways of knowing and therefore prove that it is not impossible to have objective knowledge.

It is relatively difficult to relate understanding any form of arts from different cultures to acquiring objective knowledge since objective knowledge is a justified concept that we accept and do not disprove (at least on the surface). However, we simply should not assume that there’s no objective knowledge in the arts such as music. As a composer myself, I began understanding the “behind the scenes” steps that result in a good compositions. My composition is titled “Last Waltz” and it emphasizes the overall emotions between two lovers when sharing their last dance. While the title sounds depressing due to the word “last”, the piece that I’ve composed contains a romantic (but not melancholy) feel to the dance thus allowing the couple and the listeners to enjoy the last dance to the fullest. Before composing “Last Waltz”, I have composed several other pieces to improve my creativity. I also had to listen to various waltzes such as the famous waltz “Once Upon A Dream” from Disney Classics in order to get a good idea as to what a waltz sounds like. It is through experience of composition and awareness of the culture, which defines the style, of the waltz that I was able to comprehend the meaning behind a waltz.

In music, the overall idea of composition is subjective because there is no “right or wrong” way to compose (in this case, a waltz). However, composers must know the culture of a certain style of music in order to give the right “feel” of the piece. In the case of a waltz, the piece must be relatively short and must follow a three-beat system where the time signature is three-fourth, six-eights, or nine-twelfth. Composers must also know the basic music theory in order to make it possible for the instrumentalists to play the piece the way the composers intended for it to be played. Otherwise, if the composer doesn’t even know where to place the notes on the five-line staff, how can she expect instrumentalists to play the notes that sounds right to the composer? In the case of the waltz that I composed, I was very specific on dynamics as well as notes because dynamics in music matched well with the choreography of the waltz. Therefore I had to clearly label the dynamics on sections of the piece in order for the instrumentalists to play the way I intended. All the “prerequisites” of a waltz are objective knowledge because in order for me to prove that what I composed is a waltz, I must make sure that the listeners recognize the qualities of the waltz based on their knowledge as to what makes a musical piece a waltz. And if I wanted to create a waltz, I had to meet those “prerequisites” by reason, telling myself that “It is because these qualities qualify a piece as a waltz, therefore, I must include these qualities in my piece.”

Looking at the other extreme end of the subject areas, we must acknowledge that mathematics can only be as objective as we make it. That’s because when solving problems, there is no “right or wrong” way to solve them as long as we use the objective concepts in an appropriate manner. However, we must also understand that math is relatively the most objective of the six subject areas because mathematical concepts or theorems are accepted only after the person who claims that such concept is right provides, what the society deems, enough proofs. When I was in Geometry, I remember that one of the proof-writing problems told me to prove that, given a triangle with angles A, B, and C, all three angles of a triangles add up to 180 degrees. It was a “trial and error” process for me and I faced many dead-ends because I didn‘t have enough practice. However, as I gained experience from the errors I made from these practice problems, I began noticing what mistakes to avoid; thereby, successfully proving that all three angles of a triangles add up to 180 degrees. Also, remember that it is through the use of those objective knowledge, such as properties and postulates, that I learned in Geometry I was able to write that proof.

Contrary to music, mathematical concepts are objective. There is simply no way to debate that. For example, when comparing different speeds measured by a numbered unit per time, one number represents one speed and another number represents another speed. If one squirrel travels five meters per second and another squirrel travels two meters per second, the first squirrel is faster because it travels farther than the second squirrel does. The objective concept is, the different numbers, holding the units constant, are not equivalent. In short, two is not five. Certainly when drawing the distance in a line, the two numbers don’t look have congruent lengths. We can reason this out by measuring the distance traveled by the squirrels during that second. If one-time measurement doesn’t seem convincing, simply experiment with the squirrels (let us assume that these squirrels never tire out and therefore maintain the same speed throughout the whole experiment) and measure again. After numerous times of measuring, we gain enough experience to confirm that our understanding of such objective concept is valid. However, do not assume that there is no subjectivity in mathematics. Recall my statement that there is no right or wrong way to solve a problem. This statement applies to this experiment as well because there are multiple ways of comparing speed of squirrels and we can even use squirrels that travel at different speed. In the end, however, we find ourselves knowing that different numbers are not equivalent when units of measurements are kept constant. When justifying our claims, we can reason out by saying “It is because the visual representations of the distances traveled by the squirrels during that second trial don’t match that of the first trial, therefore different numbers represented by the measurements are not equivalent.”

In music, we use objective knowledge such as music theory and music history to compose a certain type of music. But the end results are subjective, for there is no right or wrong music. In math, we use objective concepts to solve a problem, even though there’s no right or wrong way of doing it. However, most (if not all) solutions are objective. Despite the differences between the two subject areas, we allow ourselves to understand these subject areas through experiences, be it the prior knowledge of certain topics through obtaining the information from a secondary source, the repetitive process of an experiment, or simply facing the situation. Also it is through reason which allowed us to analyze the experience and therefore understand something through that experience. In the end, be it math or music, it’s very hard to separate objectivity from subjectivity when experience is involved.