Three worlds for the NeoKantians, under the sky:
In which I attempt to clean up some hopelessly tangled terms.
We humans have three distinct worlds that we track beliefs about.
World 0) There is (we must assume) the objective world, which we can't access, but which we (must) presume forms the causal basis for our sensory input.
World 1) There is our subjective world, which we form inductively from our sensory input. It is not "mere opinion", but rather each person's entire world. It is the polar opposite of solipsism to acknowledge that we are confined to this level, we do not create this world on a whim, nor with any kind of freedom: It is our map of how the world seems to behave. There are as many World 1s as there are subjects.
World 2) There is the social (quasi-real) world, in which we negotiate with other subjects all manner of things, which become very real indeed, but not in the ontological sense. Morality, Truth, Math, etc. they are all born at this level, NOT at the objective level, hence there can never be objective morality or objective truth. These are, however, concepts that largely function as if real, and which we are forced to acknowledge as real because we are social beings. The only part of these concepts that can be said to be objectively existing is the conditions in whatever parts of the objective world make up the basis for what we (in world 2 and 3) call our brains.
World 1) There is our subjective world, which we form inductively from our sensory input. It is not "mere opinion", but rather each person's entire world. It is the polar opposite of solipsism to acknowledge that we are confined to this level, we do not create this world on a whim, nor with any kind of freedom: It is our map of how the world seems to behave. There are as many World 1s as there are subjects.
World 2) There is the social (quasi-real) world, in which we negotiate with other subjects all manner of things, which become very real indeed, but not in the ontological sense. Morality, Truth, Math, etc. they are all born at this level, NOT at the objective level, hence there can never be objective morality or objective truth. These are, however, concepts that largely function as if real, and which we are forced to acknowledge as real because we are social beings. The only part of these concepts that can be said to be objectively existing is the conditions in whatever parts of the objective world make up the basis for what we (in world 2 and 3) call our brains.
As can be imagined, a lot of what people think is objectively true is just World2 stuff. The English Language, for instance, only really exists in the World1 instantiations, the idiolects. But abstracting from and negotiating with other speakers (that's how we learn the language in the first place), we project an "underlying" English Language. That, however is the polar opposite of objective - it's an abstraction, and hence it is non-real.
