In 'Menstypen in discussie' ['Human Types in Discussion'] in the 'Contemplations' series it was indicated that in discussions it is typical for emotional oriented people to ground postulates with the bringing in of own experiences.1 This is a subjective stance. This stance differs from an objective stance, which consists of the bringing in of empirical data and logic for grouding of postulates, and which is typical for intellectual oriented people.2 It was also mentioned that like the intellect is standing on a higher evolutionary plan than the emotions, objectivity is more truthful than subjectivity. Evolutionary above both the aforementioned however stands the conjectivity of the intuition.3
This intuition seems, especially for the intellectual objectivist, perhaps a return to the subjectivity, but this is not the case. Hegelian subjectivity can be understood as the 'an sich' (or 'on itself') point, objectivity as the 'für sich' (or 'for itself') point and conjectivity as the 'an und für sich' (or 'on and for itself') point.4, 5 Intuitively, which means 'truly intuitively' and not 'presupposed intuitively', is subjectively come to an objective truth. This in contrast with subjectivity where subjectivity is come to a subjective truth, and objectivity where objectively is come to an objective truth.
Now like the 'an und für sich' point of Hegel is more than the sum of the 'an sich' and 'für sich' points, although the first does contain the two latter, conjectivity is more than the sum of subjectivity and objectivity, although the latter two also are contained in the first. And although conjectivity stands thus on itself, both subjectivity and objectivity can be discerned therein. For an intuitive oriented someone it then is no problem to bring in own experiences or data and logic in communication, even though he doesn't need that himself.
An intuitive someone doesn't need it himself to come through subjectivity and objectivity to truth finding, for he can appeal on his intuition to come to a more truthful truth finding. However for his non-intuitive conversation partners it can be meaningful when he expresses himself in subjective or objective wordings. Although subjectivity and objectivity can never express a full truth, these may put the subjectivist and the objectivist on track of that truth.6, 7
Now above three perspective were mentioned: subjectivity, objectivity and conjectivity. Hereby subjectivity corresponds with the first person perspective, objectivity with the third person perspective, and conjectivity with the zeroth person perspective.8 There is however still a fourth perspective, namely the second person perspective. In this perspective is in truth finding blindly trusted in the assertions of a (specific) other human. This is a perspective which we find especially in student-teacher relations, whereby the student for truth finding trusts upon the teacher.
Now it is so also in a student-teacher relation that the teacher has to stimulate the student to own research and own truth finding. However to indicate for the student a direction for research the teacher can thereby very well make use of subjective and objective grounds for his posited postulates, even when his postulates arose from a higher ground. Where a teacher is as such acknowledged by a student he can bring in scientific data and even own experiences to put the student on track of suited self-development. Of crucial importance hereby is the acknowledgement of the student. It is meaningless for an objective or intuitive someone to bring in own experiences in communication with others, who in the field of the discussed theme do not acknowledge him as teacher.