that would fulfil the definition of objective as you put it here

so my standard for 'objectivity' is quite a bit lower

it's worthless

I think thats only a problem if you try to over rationalise everything

Human beings have limits we all live fine with these limits its not a problem

So, liking big titty elf mages as opposed to the original origin of wizards as philosophers and alchemists is indicative of personality traits that our evolution drives us to dislike?

I would seriously doubt that hentai doujins are capable of inspiring the depth of emotion that like, a great work of classic literature is capable of inspiring

and that goes for all humans

"well there ***coooooould*** be someone where it was true"

the point is

the thing itself is consistent

and it is what produces the reaction - at least insofar as human brains are somewhat similar

I think the issue is that people mistake consistency for objectivity. These are still ultimately concepts that don't exist outside of our minds. There's nothing objective about them. I don't even fully beleive reality exists as we see it, but I don't think we can ever know.

google defines objective as "not dependent on the mind for existence"

Weaboo that's why my standard for objectivity is quite a bit lower

or I mean

I get that

But it's still a dumb word to use.

my standard for objectivity is quite a bit lower, so the aesthetic objectivists have a good argument

so saying like "9/10 people agree" that doesn't fit google's definition.

its not a dumb word to use, people understand what you're talking about

if you want to be super strict about the definition of objective

then nothing meets it

because nothing is both mind-independent and comprehensible

Yeah, okay, I get that.

Okay so there is objective taste but not in a literal sense.

merriam webster "of, relating to, or being an object, phenomenon, or condition in the realm of sensible experience independent of individual thought and perceptible by all observers : having reality independent of the mind"

independent of individual thought

So from a spiritualist or a materialist standpoint there are beauty standards that we regard as objectively good.

the point is that there is a ***really existing quality*** in great works of literature that is ***really capable*** of producing greater depth of emotion (whatever physical reality that corresponds to) in human beings

compared to a hentai doujin

There are hentai doujins that I beleive have emotional depth, though.

Only one, actually. Emergence.

yeah but its probably not the same

I mean

you could even say that that doujin may be objectively more beautiful than other doujins

Ok, not depth, but it can induce an emotional reaction from the reader, which isn't depth. There are plenty of doujins that would make you feel disgust, and that dosen't mean they have depth.

But I do like Emergence, but I was exaggerating when I compared it to Oedipus Rex.

Or Oldboy.

most doujins are probably not written with the objective of having depth

maybe an artist could try to make one that is really deep