As a psychophysicist I see it differently and more simply

Objective is potentially available to all. Not to be confused with Quantative
So audio/visual files presenting the view of an individual are OBJECTIVE. They may include objective material such as Jo is my sibling, objectively verifiable, or subjective data such as ���I feel very good today���. But the records themselves are objective.
Analyses of such objective data may be objective, e.g. the number of times ���NOT��� was used, or subjective, this protocol suggests a ���pathological��� personality. 
Subjective  is only available to an individual experiencer. Not to be confused with qualitative
If an individual says that some physical sound is seems to be 15 times as loud as some other��� standard��� physical sound then the data is quantitative but subjective.

As regards probability and risk.

Risk and probability are more complex
This is because they can refer to either samples or populations, possibly/usually hypothetical.
E.g. a fair coin has .5 probability of landing heads. Given  sample of known size one can estimate the probability that coin is fair. Given 4heads /4 throws, sample = 1 not unlikely; given 400 heads out of 400 throws sample p =1, a fair coin, you cannot be serious and I am not meeting in that lottery.

In the real world, people make their own estimates of probability on whatever sample data is available. In many cases only sample data is available. In other cases, population data IS available, e.g N entering letter and N prizes. Here subjective refers to the data a person chooses to use. This is so whether or not objective data is available.

Subjective should not be pejorative, unless it means making poor or no use of available data
In fact all estimates of risk are subjective. What  is to be avoided is  choosing not to use available data.
best
Diana



On 18 Feb 2021, at 11:00, Gert De Cooman <Gert.DeCooman@UGent.be> wrote:

Dear colleagues and friends

I agree that objective and subjective are not the most ideal of terms, and that they have acquired unwanted connotations through years of intellectual (and other) debate. For this reason, amongst others, I prefer to use a different (and not entirely equivalent) differentiation, which in my view is less clouded by ideological issues: epistemic (relying on informed knowledge/beliefs) and physical (related to physical phenomena).

Every good wish, Gert

Prof. Gert de Cooman
Universiteit Gent (ELIS���Foundations Lab) ��� Durham University (Department of Mathematical Sciences)
Technologiepark - Zwijnaarde 125, 9052 Zwijnaarde, Belgium
t: +3292645653 ��� iMessage: +32496832628
e: gert.decooman@UGent.be
w: users.ugent.be/~gdcooma


Op 17 feb. 2021, om 18:26 heeft Kreinovich, Vladik <vladik@utep.edu> het volgende geschreven:

Dear Friends,
 
We often talk and write about objective and subjective probabilities, about objective and subjective measures of uncertainty. However, at a recent conference on uncertainty, Yakov Ben-Haim made an important observation -- based on his experience of working on applications with colleagues from many different areas. 
 
His experience is that in many application areas, the word ���subjective��� has a negative connotation: it means unjustified estimates based on gut feeling only, prone to bias and wild variations.
 
Such gut-feeling-based estimations sometimes happen, but mostly, when we talk about ���subjective���, we mean judgmental estimates, estimates which are not just coming out of gut feeling, but which can be usually provided with some justification. For example, if we estimate to what extent someone is young (one of Zadeh���s original examples) we can usually explain the degree we assign to ���youngness��� of an individual by referring to features which are present and which are typical young age ��� and features of this individual which are more typical for mature-age folks. 
 
For example, subjective probability often means simply probability that is not coming from the analysis of frequency, but from expert estimates.
 
Yakov���s recommendations is to use words like ���judgmental��� (or ���expert-based���) instead of ���subjective��� in such situations, especially when working on applications ��� and applications are the main goal of uncertainty studies in the first place.
_______________________________________________
SIPTA mailing list -- sipta@lists.idsia.ch
To unsubscribe send an email to sipta-leave@lists.idsia.ch

_______________________________________________
SIPTA mailing list -- sipta@lists.idsia.ch
To unsubscribe send an email to sipta-leave@lists.idsia.ch

_____________________________
Professor Diana Kornbrot
Mobile +44 (0) 7403 18 16 12
http://dianakornbrot.wordpress.com/   
University of Hertfordshire
College Lane, Hatfield, Hertfordshire AL10 9AB, UK
d.e.kornbrot@herts.ac.uk