Reducing distortions
The implication of Habermas' idea of analysis to reduce distortions is based on two assumptions. It is assumed firstly, that objectivity can ever be reached and secondly, that objectivity is central to the professional discourse underpinning practice. Our every day understandings of ideas such as truth, judgement and professional practice imply that objectivity is not only possible but necessary. However, these assumptions about the importance of objectivity seem to constantly force us to ask, and to justify the question: what is wrong with subjectivity?
We must recognize that subjectivity can also be a useful dimension in the process of professional reflection. But we need to consider why subjectivity is either neglected or rejected. There are a number of questions we can pose:
- what are the consequences of taking a subjective stance?
- what might be the limitations of trying to be completely objective?
- what might be the advantages of attempting to reflect subjectively?