Objective thinking is therefore aware only of itself and is therefore no communication. – Kierkegaard Concluding Unscientific Postscript VII 58.
Kierkegaard tears to shreds the myth of objectivity and demonstrates that such a belief leads to dehumanising behaviour. The myth of objectivity becomes the disposition for objective power over others.
When this is the foundation of an investigation, people are brutalised in the process.
In his discussion on Concluding Unscientific Postscript VII 56 Kierkegaard states:
‘The subjective existing thinker is aware of the dialectic of communication. Whereas, objective thinking is indifferent to the thinking subject and his existence.’
Furthermore:
‘Objectively the emphasis in on what is said, subjectively the emphasis is on how it is said’ (VII 169.)
In our latest book SEEK Investigations, A Semiotic Method (https://www.humandymensions.com/product/seek-investigations-a-semiotic-method/) for free download, we analyse the 22 most common approaches to investigation. None adequately deal with the bias of the investigator.
Yet, this is where any investigation methodology should start. Who is the investigator? What disposition do they bring to the investigation? What is their personality type? What is their cultural background? How has their experience of risk been shaped? What is their history?
These are many more critical questions should precede any investigation methodology. Unfortunately, most investigations methods don’t even discuss their methodology or own bias. Many of the assumptions of these methods are never discussed indeed, many assume and believe the myth of objectivity.
Somehow, the human coming to the investigation can empty themselves of all they are and approach an investigation as a neutral, impartial and objective agent!
Similarly, most of these investigation methods never discuss the ethical foundations of their method. This too must come from a declaration of methodology (philosophy). We observe the myth of objectivity and impartiality on open display in the AIHS Code of Ethics.
What a fascinating position, setting up the activity of safety for arrogance, superiority and disconnectedness. This is amplified when the biases and subjectivities of the investigation method are embedded in an investigations system and process.
Of course, if one is objective, one must already know what the truth is! For, where did that objectivity come from? Because it can’t be internal, it must be external! This is the ethic of Natural Law Ethics (from Kant).
In what world can a person be objective and impartial? We know the answer, they can’t.
So, we need an investigation method that is open, honest, transparent and ethical that enables the best possible outcome given the constraints and paradox of human subjectivity. The key is not being blind to subjectivity but embracing it and ensuring that all those in the investigation know what filters are embedded in the investigation. We do this is SEEK and this delivers very different outcomes to those that maintain the myth of objectivity.
If you want to learn how to become a SEEK investigator, you can undertake training and coaching here: admin@spor.com.au
Prof. Robert Long
Latest posts by Prof. Robert Long (see all)
- Moral Unease and Safety – A Podcast With Desai Link - April 18, 2026
- Weick’s Grook and The Authority/Power Myth - April 17, 2026
- The Dialectic of Weick – Free Workshops - April 16, 2026
- What Does Weick Believe About Flux – Free Workshops - April 16, 2026
- A Puzzle, Ambiguity and Mysticism – Free Weick Workshops - April 16, 2026
Do you have any thoughts? Please share them below