The Disconsolation of Philosophy, Part I

I often think of philosophy, the big questions of why we are here, and of course, once I start doing that, all sorts of quirky problems appear. For example, take the great question, that has puzzled us for all of time, is reality objective truth, or the subjective whims of the mind? I fall into the objective camp, the world goes on, no cares what I think, but subjective action changes things, our emotions can cause a big stink. Subjective whims dug deepest canals, and put astronauts up on the moon, the objective world changes due to them, which, when you think about it, is cool. I mean we see that in our own lives, subjective whims drive our day-to-day, the universe itself is lifeless, subjective consciousness guides our way. But then I think, the actions we take are objective, and can be measured, subjectives drive us to real world acts, objectivity won’t go unserved. Which means the subjective is not real, it can’t be measured, only it’s outcome, which, for a while, makes me convinced that this world is an objective one. Plus the fact that you have these feelings is in itself an objective truth, that such thoughts happened, you’re aware of, your brain and body are objective too. Which means subjective unmeasurables are bound to material flesh and blood, what can’t be contained ends up contained… I try to make sense, but have no luck. Though beyond the task of measurement, the concepts themselves throw a road-block, something that goes beyond semantics and the quirks of language, how we talk. Can the idea of a subjective without objective even exist? Is not subjective a mere subset of the objective that claims all of this? Would not objective reality have to exist for the mere thought of the subjective to even arise, is not the objective the first cause? Would either exist without the other, could they be understood without contrast? No good without evil, up without down, without one the other one can’t last... CONCLUDES IN PART II.