Social Residues

What is the value of one man’s belief in a collectively consensual society going against that belief? None- he’s insane.

At least that’s what the population would think. But it’s not the least in significance such labels would pose. It matters what people think. As much as some would deny this importance or even feel for the person so labeled, no one can detract from the truth that subjectivity determines facts.

It is true that everything is subjective. Why then, do some garner more votes than others? Perhaps that is subjective as well? In this situation, how does one tell subjectivity from favourtism? It is in these social loopholes that people impose individualistic opinions whilst claiming to be under the veil of subjectivity, is it not?

In law, it is well settled that ignorance of the law is no defence- it is an irrefutable avenue that everyone would pursue. As I’d observed, the same enforcement cannot be seen in human behavioural ethics in a morally obligatory way, at least as strong in effect as this legal doctrine imposes.

Do people ‘see through’ these selfish endeavours? Perhaps they chose to turn a blind eye, because they help to pursue one’s own interests. Or that such a perception could easily be a projection of another’s subjective reality. Like I’ve said, it’s indiscernible. In modern civilization, it is not astounding to consider such a view as the human nature constantly finds its way to manifest its internal desires. In a more sophisticated manner, I would say.

Then again, it could all be absolutely fictional.