Within the university, the concept of objectivity has been used as a shibboleth by two different groups of academics. The first are academics who profess claims of objectivity while obscuring practices and decisions that are subjective. The second are academics who assert that there is no objectivity and conclude that the only form of knowledge available to scholars is one's own subjectivity. Both positions are untenable in a world where various actions lead to diverse ends with notably different consequences.
Value judgments underpin social thought.
Consequently, those who hide behind unquestioned objectivity create an illusion of the world rather than address the way ideas and events work in it. On the other hand, those who limit themselves to subjective discourse assert that no idea is better than another and relinquish the critical thought necessary to evaluate competing claims of knowledge. What these academics advocate dismisses any evidence that can demonstrate that certain narratives, ideas, values, goals, and consequences are better than others. Indeed, they seek to undermine the confidence to make judgments. Disturbingly, the assumptions and practice of the latter group of academics has gained ascendancy in much current criticism and teaching, emphasizing subjectivity as the dominant form of academic production while devaluing and displacing essential modes and priorities of critical thought.