About subjectivism writes the «Routledge Dictionary of Philosophy».
'Subjectivism viewpoint or viewpoints that states that what appears as objective truths or rules in certain spheres, namely ethics, are really disguised orders or expressions of attitude, etc., eg, "Lying is wrong" should be regarded as stating a fact not objective, but as really the order "Never lie!" or an expression of hostility against the speaker's lying, like "Lying! Grrr!" (See Naturalism). An alternate version of subjectivism says that the statements in question express objective truths, but only on human minds, desires, beliefs, experiences, etc., whether the speaker or the general public. "Lying is wrong" would then mean "I, or perhaps people generally disapprove of lying" (Michael Proudfoot and AR Lacey, The Routledge Dictionary of Philosophy, 4th edition, page 390, the letter in bold is placed by me).
Proudfoot and Lacey confuse the definition of subjectivism with the generating mechanism of subjectivism, ie, they confuse the 'formal cause' in Aristotelian language, with "efficient cause." Subjectivism has a dual definition, epistemic and sociological: doctrine that truth is intimate and unique to each person this, the truth varies from person to person, there is not a single general truth . " It is the most radical gnosiologic individualism .
Saying that subjectivism is just an order or set of orders disguised, as above asserts the Routledge Dictionary, is to confuse subjectivism with prescriptivism and emotivism (note that there is a subjective emotionalism and an objective emotivism) and it is set aside the intellectual content representative of a particular consciousness. Saying that subjectivism is an attitude of hostility towards the speaker is to confuse the final product (the idea, the subjectivist statement) with the agent that produced it (the emotion of the subject) - we come back, again, to the confusion between efficient cause and formal cause. Subjectivism in the sociological sense (one person, one mind alone) opposes objectivism in the sociological sense (many minds sharing the same objective truth) but is not opposed to objectivism in epistemic order (truth itself).
Example: we are a minority of thinkers isolates (sociological subjectivism ) affirming that the conclusions of French doctor J.Tissot and American doctor Herbert Shelton, that vaccination is a deaf poisoning of the human organism by viruses and toxins and vaccines are always harmful but we epistemic grasp the truth (epistemic objectivism) while the overwhelming majority of the population (sociological objectivism) believes, wrongly, that the vaccines 'immunize' prevent and eradicate diseases (epistemic subjectivism, one might say). The imposition of the theory of vaccination as "official truth" is not the result of any rational discussion public, enlarged, on fair terms. It is a pure act that the fascist elite semi thinking of physicians and researchers and politicians laboratory carries out with the agreement of the party and uncultured majority of the population of each count
© (Rights of author to Francisco Limpo de Faria Queiroz)