a) I believe this to be correct...though more so WHEN LEARNING PHILOSOPHY
FROM SCRATCH so to speak.
Take it from me one-has-to-learn the difference between these things, if not least
because they are STILL confused as taught.
b) one cannot hope to understand the difference between objectivism & subjectivist
type philosophy without referring to the GENERALLY ACCEPTED METHOD
of Philosophy. This is called "the critical method" & I myself have asked about
this very method here in this category.
Interesting answers because it seemed very much to me that virtually all agreed
that THIS WAS the method of philosophy YET WERE UNABLE TO FULLY
More exclusively they were unable to use this method upon things like philosophy
FROM THE PAST - and we aren't talking specifically from-a-long-time ago in the
time of the ancient Greeks (when it all started for us) but also within the NEAR
PAST - math & environmental examples to be more specific.
Since all of that I moved on & found that now within modern (objective) philosophy
there can BE A PLACE for a (more historical &) personal subjective philosophy.
This place would have-to-be at the FAR End of a new philosophy Spectrum..
where "philosophy" itself would be the main player & the main "authoritative
driver" so to speak. The good thing about such a spectrum would be that there
is a PLACE for this type-of-philosophy to exist & be recognised : and even a
special possible partner with either science or mathematical science as its
"partner" so to speak (the scientists/ mathematicians may not like it but could
change with the results apparent...
There is another big change which philosophy AS TAUGHT subjectively has
to engage. This change applies to the MAKING OF MISTAKES within philosophy
itself. Specifically within the Environment of Philosophy which as you may know
is first & foremost a pure subject or category, one where it has rarely been seen &
understood by subjectivists.
I have explained a lot of this in the past & its "open" if you can access that better...
Anyway..If we take the physical environmental planetary concerns that are of
a real threat now, so to make our thought-solutions first EVEN FASTER so that
we don't run-out-of-time (before we reach a CO2 saturation point in about 7 years)
SIMILARLY we should propose the same here IN PURE Philosophy...where we
MAKE OUR MISTAKES FASTER & faster & so not only building up philosophy
after centuries of neglect but also trying to see just why learning philosophy in
particular can make us happier, more sensitive perhaps & more relaxed to
learn it as it would be a lot easier (to learn & understand) in such a future place too.
So much for -- learning from our mistakes (!)
I hope that this is sufficient to try to engage with your philosophy question above, also
perhaps some of the other questions that you have.
(my Q's & A's as source))