1. Intersubjectivity. This concept is handy for a number of reasons. For one, it explains why people-even writers and editors-claim that aesthetic quality is subjective. Note, claim. Not think. Nobody actually thinks that aesthetic quality is subjective. We know this because nobody walks into a store or library and selects books at random to read. (Lots of people select books haphazardly or in response to some marketing signal that makes a book "look good", but people aren't even capable of randomly choosing a book with their eyes open.)
Intersubjectivity tells us why young teens enjoy terrible books like Twilight–not because the book isn't terrible, but because they crave the personal and social experience the book provides. Indeed, people can both crave some experience and be simultaneously aware that some book isn't any good. President Bill Clinton reads many mysteries, and calls them, "“my little cheap thrills outlet.” (One of many, haha, get it!) Were quality subjective, it actually wouldn't be possible to conflate one's preferences for the moment with high quality-one wouldn't be aware that one can have multiple preferences that can be served, at times, with bad books and stories and at other times with good books and stories. Basically, intersubjectivity means that conversations are possible—even internal ones—and conclusions can be drawn. It also means that some opinions may be more credible than others. Finally, it means that discussions about whether some book or story need not start and simultaneously end with, "I like it! You have no mathophysics showing it's bad, so you're a snotty asshole!" Like does not equal good.
2. Speaking of mathophysics: positivism. Amusingly, many people who insist that quality is subjective will also insist that science fiction is better than fantasy, because science is better than metaphysics—a claim they make by pointing out the obviously true fact that technology works much much better and more often than religious or occult practices. When nerdosphere types talk about "science" though, they are often just defending positivism—thus social sciences are all suspect, except, ironically, for the heavily philosophical Austrian school of economics. Intuitions about individualism are considered self-evident and transhistorical truths. (Check out how often some fairly normal cultural practice or common sense position is described as "alien.") The limits of positivism are denounced as appeals to the supernatural or simply unscientific. A discussion of how, for example, female authors might view the Singularity differently due to different life-experiences with the body, is dismissed as "irrational." Of course, the "other side" of such arguments often do make explicit or implicit appeals to mysticism, often due to grabbing any ol' candlestick to club positivism over the head with. But positivism isn't science, and "science" isn't the obvious end result of whatever dumbass thought processes you went through in order to defend and justify pre-existing preferences for or against spanking children or voting for one political party over another or liking Book A more than Book B.
Obviously, one can, and people have, written entire books about these two concepts. But sadly, none of the books about either intersubjectivity or positivism have rockets on the cover, so... If you want to know more, pick up a title or two.
Intersubjectivity tells us why young teens enjoy terrible books like Twilight–not because the book isn't terrible, but because they crave the personal and social experience the book provides. Indeed, people can both crave some experience and be simultaneously aware that some book isn't any good. President Bill Clinton reads many mysteries, and calls them, "“my little cheap thrills outlet.” (One of many, haha, get it!) Were quality subjective, it actually wouldn't be possible to conflate one's preferences for the moment with high quality-one wouldn't be aware that one can have multiple preferences that can be served, at times, with bad books and stories and at other times with good books and stories. Basically, intersubjectivity means that conversations are possible—even internal ones—and conclusions can be drawn. It also means that some opinions may be more credible than others. Finally, it means that discussions about whether some book or story need not start and simultaneously end with, "I like it! You have no mathophysics showing it's bad, so you're a snotty asshole!" Like does not equal good.
2. Speaking of mathophysics: positivism. Amusingly, many people who insist that quality is subjective will also insist that science fiction is better than fantasy, because science is better than metaphysics—a claim they make by pointing out the obviously true fact that technology works much much better and more often than religious or occult practices. When nerdosphere types talk about "science" though, they are often just defending positivism—thus social sciences are all suspect, except, ironically, for the heavily philosophical Austrian school of economics. Intuitions about individualism are considered self-evident and transhistorical truths. (Check out how often some fairly normal cultural practice or common sense position is described as "alien.") The limits of positivism are denounced as appeals to the supernatural or simply unscientific. A discussion of how, for example, female authors might view the Singularity differently due to different life-experiences with the body, is dismissed as "irrational." Of course, the "other side" of such arguments often do make explicit or implicit appeals to mysticism, often due to grabbing any ol' candlestick to club positivism over the head with. But positivism isn't science, and "science" isn't the obvious end result of whatever dumbass thought processes you went through in order to defend and justify pre-existing preferences for or against spanking children or voting for one political party over another or liking Book A more than Book B.
Obviously, one can, and people have, written entire books about these two concepts. But sadly, none of the books about either intersubjectivity or positivism have rockets on the cover, so... If you want to know more, pick up a title or two.