In the company it is possible to discern Who is more important? Priority of the subject (human capital) or priority of the object (the company)?
Subjectivism arises formally in terms of knowledge, and is later attributed, by analogy, to other types of human action. Since in classical Greece knowledge is spoken of, it is postulated as a relationship whose extremes are constituted by the knowing subject and the known object (Subject-human capital); in other words, if there is no human capital, the company as such would not make sense. There cannot be a knowledge that is not subjective, because there is no room for knowledge without knowing. Another thing is subjectivism.
The truth consists in the coincidence, in the adjustment, in the adequacy between subject and object, that is, between the intellect and the thing -being-. The order of precedence, the hierarchy, appears here as a fundamental element, because the sense of knowledge will rotate depending on whether the extreme axis on which the other extreme depends, consists of the intellect or the thing; Therefore, the point of view will depend on the point of support where the perspective is raised and will still depend on the fact that instead of priority, both poles are considered balanced in the hierarchy, in which case there would be no dependency, directly in the process of decision making.
The solution rests on the active or passive nature of the elements, which is why the subject is able to take his own initiative or, for the most part, stay in his comfort zone. There will be no priority in the case in which subject and object are identical. Business when the subject is not interested or does not perceive the importance of the object; but it is necessary, when speaking of "identity", to qualify a little. It is not, of course, about real identity, but about functional identity. In the self-knowledge of a finite knower, since his knowing is different from his being, in order to know the subject, himself, he has to "function" as an object, that is, in order to know something about himself, he must assume the role of object. Of being an infinite knower,Such intelligence, because it is not limited, is simple and is identified with its act -and with its substrate-; at the risk of considering it composed and falling into a contradiction. It is the case of God.
The priority in infinite knowledge in companies.
The truth, in the Pure Act, is Subsistent Truth. This is speculative truth. The practical truth is not defined briefly as the adequacy between being and the intellect, but as the adequacy of the intellect and the thing to be done. If it is about the infinite Intellect, the practical truth is the adaptation of things with the Intellect that thought them. One-sided dependence appears, for the first time, along these lines: finite reality is measured, in its very being, by the infinite Understanding. All our actions are designed and generated in the being itself because it knows its limitations and handles everything that exists in its cognitive element., working awareness that understanding is infinite. For this reason we do not know many things around us; however we perceive our limitation.
The practical knowledge in God is creative, and the creature depends on the being that creates it - also cognitively - because its essence is known by the infinite Being as one of the many ways it can be imitated.
For this reason it is possible to perform skillfully in some specific activity in the workplace; For this reason, companies are made up of departments that in turn have defined jobs in terms of their activities, obligations, responsibilities and limitations.
The priority in infinite knowledge.
The truth, in the Pure Act, is Subsistent Truth. This is speculative truth. The practical truth is not defined briefly as the adequacy between the being and the intellect, but as the adequacy of the intellect and the thing to be done. If it is about the infinite Intellect, the practical truth is the adaptation of things with the Intellect that thought them. Unilateral dependence appears, for the first time, along these lines: finite reality is measured, in its very being, by the infinite Understanding 2. This relationship establishes the link between the designed processes, the Projects, and all those elements generated within the company with the human capital who thought and designed it.
The practical knowledge in God is creative, and the creature depends on the being that creates it - also cognitively - because its essence is known by the infinite Being as one of the many ways it can be imitated.
The priority in human theoretical knowledge. In the order of finite intelligences, speculative knowledge can also be considered on the one hand, and practical knowledge on the other.
Theoretical knowing assumes that - given reality - knowing is intentionally transforming into the known. Such a transformation rests and is based on the knowable, on the thing: it is the positive pole that updates the finite understanding in its operation. Despite the fact that reality is not something static, but becoming, its theoretical consideration pours precisely on what is necessary, that is, on its "given" and permanent ingredient. This facticity measures the intellect and postulates that the finite knowing subject must make a judgment such that it bends to the being of the thing, affirming what is united in it or denying what is separated in it. The primacy here is on the object side.
The priority in human practical knowledge.
If it is about human practical knowledge, the primacy points to the opposite extreme: the subject, measuring the degree of modifiability of the thing, builds an ideal model, idea. What has been done - whether it is an artifact or a moral action - depends, to be true, on its coincidence with the idea - paradigm. For this reason, human capital tends to break paradigms, create new schemes, all built through actions.
The practical knowledge in man is creative "secundum quid", and that creature depends on the intellect that devised it. For all the above, the things we design definitely resemble who created them and that is why it is difficult to get rid of our ideas of ourselves.
The concept, as a mental representation, belongs to the realm of speculative understanding. The idea, as a germinal model, is situated in the territory of practical understanding. You always have ideas to improve, to make more efficient or even to be competitive, however the challenge is to create the model and execute it.
The hierarchy between theoretical and practical knowledge in man (human capital).
Subjectivism takes place when speculative knowledge is substituted for practical knowledge. It is a deprivation due to disorder in the hierarchy. Therefore it is said that nothing is as simple as it is perceived with the naked eye, that is, everything has its degree of complexity and is known until it is put into practice.
Theoretical, speculative knowledge is not only ontologically more perfect than practical knowledge, but it is constituted, at the same time, in its condition of possibility, in its a-priori. Speculative knowledge is oriented to what is necessary, and in this it is distinguished from practical knowledge whose end is the contingent. It happens that the contingent consists in the negation of what is necessary, to such an extent that there are as many types of contingency as there are ways to deny the need that is better known in the business world as pretexts, and the much-mentioned "I can't" which is identical to "I do not want". Expressed metaphorically, the contingent is a crack that opens into what is necessary, so that it cannot be known except in the context of need, and from it.For all the above, let's imagine for a second its application in work activities, challenges, competitiveness among the most important.
Now, contingent realities are contingent on the part of matter, since contingent is what can and cannot be, and the power lies in matter as we understand uncertainty and risk in business. Necessity, on the other hand, is involved in the very concept of form, insofar as what is a consequence of form is necessarily possessed.
But matter is the principle of individuation, while universality is obtained by abstracting the form of particular matter. But we have already said that the direct and necessary object of the understanding is the universal, and that of the senses the singular, which indirectly is also in some way the object of the understanding. Thus, then, contingent realities, as contingent, are known directly by the senses and indirectly by the understanding; on the other hand, the universal and necessary notions of those same contingent realities are known only to the understanding; For this reason, the whole is the company and its parts are its integration. To understand a problem, it is diagnosed exactly where it was generated in order to control its expansion and extinguish it as soon as possible.
Consequently, if the universal reasons for things that can be the object of science are considered, all sciences have for their object what is necessary. But if things are considered in themselves, some sciences have as their object the necessary, and others the contingent. ' (S.Th. I q.86 a.4).
To pretend that thought - the idea - measures reality, is perfectly legal if it is about practical knowledge; applied to speculative knowing it is identified with idealism and with subjectivism -the (finite) subject creates reality-. This is why pragmatism exemplifies an acute kind of subjectivism.
Certain pragmatists put in parentheses the note of "knowledge" that constitutes the genre of practical knowledge, to remain exclusively with the differentiating note "practical"; They generally use Greek expressions such as praxis, techné, poiesis, thus avoiding manifesting their kinship -cognitive- with the theory. They avoid speaking of truth or error in the practice and introduce a substitute as a dimensional criterion: success or failure, success or failure. At the bottom of this solution - false - lies the confusion between performance and effectiveness. In effect, there is no practical truth without realization, because the knowledge of the modifiability of things is an empirical knowledge. Therefore, for an idea to be completed, it is necessary that as soon as the initiation of that model appears,always continue to differentiate with the help of experience. It would be impossible, for example, to make an administrative model «a priori», because only the index, the framework and the limits of the modifiability of the company or flexibility can be known, through the «a posteriori», «empirical» attempt to modify it.. Certain pragmatists put in parentheses the note of "knowledge" that constitutes the genre of practical knowledge, to remain exclusively with the differentiating note "practical"; They generally use Greek expressions such as praxis, techné, poiesis, thus avoiding manifesting their kinship -cognitive- with the theory. They avoid speaking of truth or error in the practice and introduce a substitute as a dimensional criterion: success or failure, success or failure. At the bottom of this solution -false-,lies the confusion between performance and efficacy. Indeed, there is no practical truth without realization, because the knowledge of the modifiability of things is an empirical knowledge. For this reason, for an idea to be completed, it is necessary that as soon as the initiation of that model appears, it always continues to differentiate with the help of experience. It would be impossible, for example, to make an administrative model «a priori», because the index, the framework and the limits of the modifiability of the company can only be known, through the «a posteriori», «empirical» attempt to modify it.
However, a defect by accident cannot be raised to the constant range. The relevant distinctions must be made. The true conclusion supposes - except for an accidental defect - a true antecedent. The exception is eliminated if the condition is met that the syllogism structure - that ideational product that serves as a skeleton for conceptual thought - is correct. In its order, the effective result supposes a true idea if the condition is fulfilled that the background structure (no longer the mold, but the concept on which the idea rests) is rational.This means that praxis depends on theory, and that not being aware of this arrangement exaggerates it. (When "straight ratio" - right reason - is pointed out as the defining genre of practical knowledge of both doing and doing, this should be interpreted, in my opinion, not only in the sense that the product is well manufactured or that the action responds to the convenience hic et nunc of free acting, but also and first, that it fits into the rational "whole" of being, that as a contingent it is measured in terms of the necessary whole. To exemplify it is not enough to manufacture well-made products, It is also necessary that their manufacture responds to an order, in such a way that it is not because well done that they are manufactured so profusely that they could occupy the entire surface of the earth), for this reason we have business lines, product lines.
Certainty and opinion in human knowledge (Expression of opinions for timely decision-making)
Put aside, now, the species of knowledge in order to their end, and consider those that multiply as a function of the security of the subject. The judgment - which is the place of truth - can be pronounced with certainty or by way of opinion. (P. Quevedo has synoptically reduced some fundamental questions about the definition and division of opinion. We use for the present purpose some elements of this synopsis). Before the evidence the intellect bows, and from its unconditional surrender the fruit of certainty is obtained; the spirit rests in it, also unconditionally. It frequently happens, however, that before the understanding a proposition is not presented as an evident truth, but with a certain probability index and, added to this,the abandonment of the contradictory proposition for absence of reasons in its support. In cases like this, the intelligence remains undefeated: such a proposition can only be assumed by the spirit by virtue of a voluntary and free act. Intelligence insecurely adheres to the proposition, and also provisionally; it is probable knowledge.
The hierarchy (order) between certainty and opinion.
When a probable intellectual assent is transferred to be assumed to be true, subjectivism takes place. If an object is not sufficiently luminous to wound the pupils of the intellect, there is a supplementary function of the spirit, it is possible that the spirit - thanks to its unrestricted openness to being - subsidizes the object in what it lacks to be able to be affirmed in a judgment, or to be loved in an election. It is about the natural structure of behavior in the field of opinion and in the field of free choice.
The abuse would be to transfer this scheme to the field of true knowledge, to call the probable true is to fall into subjectivism. It is, as in the case of theoretical-practical knowledge, an investment of values in the hierarchy. Because here as there, what is debatable requires the a priori of what is true, what can only be understood as what is lacking certainty.
The subjectivist attitude appears, the same, when the existence of true knowledge is denied, pretending to reduce all natural knowledge to opinionable knowledge; The reason for this is that the hierarchy is broken both by denying the existence of certain knowledge -in his case of the theoretical- and by subjecting the certain knowledge to the probable -in his case the theoretical to the practical- or by reducing certain knowledge to probable -in his case the theoretical to the practical-.
The outdated affectivity and subjectivism in the human capital of the company.
The constant in both species of subjectivism is found in the disordered participation of affectivity in the order of knowledge. The role of affectivity -and precisely- of the will, is reduced to the order of execution. However, in practical knowledge it intervenes in what corresponds to external realization, thus influencing the knowledge of what is operable thanks to what is operated.
Regarding opinion, the will - and sometimes the passions - move in terms of specification. The types of knowledge in which the supreme values are embodied for their respective hierarchy, present very pure species of intellectual sign. It seems as if by keeping them on the cusp that belongs to them, the objectivity of knowledge is safe; because on the contrary, by degrading true knowledge or dethroning speculative knowledge, subjectivism appears and with it the decline of knowing everything.
The objectivity - improperly said - of the good.
To speak of objectivity or subjectivism, in the proper sense, is to speak of knowledge. In an improper and derived sense, one can also speak of objectivity or subjectivism, applying these categories to other values, always by analogy with the truth. It is so with good. Like knowledge, higher affectivity rests on the subject-object poles. In the infinite Being they cease to be poles, they are identified. In its activity "ad extra" the infinite appetite is perfecting, it confers perfection.
The finite appetite can confront two different species of goods: that species that is indispensable for its fulfillment, -although its use implies free choice- and that other species that can freely love without transcendental consequences in order to its human fulfillment, that is, depending on its ultimate purpose. The first species constitutes the realm of morality; the second, that of safe preferences. To pretend that moral choice depends on subjective preferences and to function according to the indifference of the one who chooses, is to confuse the order of the particular useful -or delightful-good with the stratum of the honest good. And thus alter the hierarchy. The argument that supports this arrangement of dignities is analogous to the previous ones.The a priori of the useful good is the useless good - and the honest is useless - since what is useful is what is desirable by another and that other consists precisely in the useless good.
Objectivity can also be attributed to beauty, and therefore the problem of subjectivism can be analyzed in it. Despite the distinctions that this task would require, they would open a parenthesis that is too long, interrupting the thread of the present reflection.
Two fundamentally different ways of lacking.
So far, subjectivism in relative transcendentals appears on the predicamental plane. It could not happen otherwise, because the Infinite Subject is infallible, and subjectivism supposes an axiological failure.
And a double axiological fault. In the first place, the very finiteness of the faculty of the limited being, postulates a failure when measured by the real that confronts it; This failure is expressed in the lack of coincidence between the hierarchy of the existing ones and the hierarchy pronounced by the respective finite faculty, through an intellectual judgment or through an act of choice. Man has the right to be wrong because he is incapable of knowing all of reality in all its aspects and he is also incapable of knowing in a certain way everything he knows.
However, within these restrictions, the faculty must allow itself to be adequately measured in certain fundamental aspects. And this duty rests precisely on their ability to do so. Error and evil - ugliness as well - are not unequivocally said of failure versus truth and versus good. There are, as it were, errors and harmless evils that express only certain accidental results of the limitation of being.And there are, by contrast, pitiful errors and evils, which wound the being and affect it from within, while affecting universal theology. Thanks to his freedom, any man can love a flower in preference to a worm. Such a preference certainly supposes a disorder in the hierarchy, because the goodness of being depends on its ontological dignity, which is more fully in the beast than in the vegetable. It is, then, a disorder, but a disorder without transcendence, a disorder foreseen in the dynamics of the finite being, and that therefore does not affect it negatively.
Also thanks to freedom, it is possible to prefer to murder a man instead of seeking the virtue of justice. It is, the same, a disorder, but an entirely different disorder: a disorder that hurts the being by removing it from its end. As regards the truth, it is irrelevant that an understanding errs expressing judgments by way of opinion. The serious thing is that he errs by assuring with certainty something that he is only capable of saying with fear of being wrong. Nor does it matter that an artist is governed by a germinal idea opposed to many other possible ones, that this idea is ineffective; the serious thing is that in what is necessary, theoretically, it tries to find valid answers opposed to each other.
The universal characteristics of subjectivism.
In short: when the subject is not at the level of the object -such happens due to deficiency, in opinion and in praxis- the spirit supplies subsidizing the precarious faculty. This is perfectly legal as long as such substitution is not forgotten with the consequent conditioning.
If this is neglected, the scales -subject-object- become unbalanced by the weight of subjectivism.
Subjectivism, in a broad sense, originates in the transposition of the subject's force to the side of the object to complete it in its intelligibility or in its friendliness, thus making it sufficient to be able to imprison the subject in knowledge or in love: this transposition has been carried out and that substitution, subjectivism consists in pretending that the subject has not produced such a complementary function and that it is the sufficiency of the object that causes the balance or the co-adaptation between both extremes.
This results from having forgotten that only being absolute as intelligible or as friendly is capable of dragging the subject in an infallible way to pronounce itself in truth or in love.
