Structural Perspective and Subjective Stance
1.2 Structural Perspective and Subjective Stance
In traditional cognition, we are accustomed to pursuing the so-called “objective truth.”
However, no human judgment can ever fully escape its own circumstances.
Every judgment begins from the stance of “I.”
For example:
- In the same meeting, the boss may feel that employees are passive, while employees may feel the boss is aggressive.
- In a relationship, one person may see “care,” while the other sees “control.”
- In a negotiation, the buyer may feel it’s a “good deal,” while the seller feels “pressured.”
The facts have not changed, but different stances lead to entirely different interpretations and meanings.
This shows: structure is not an inherent property of the external world, but a cognitive product activated by stance.
Therefore, structural language must make clear:
- Start from the subjective — every structural analysis must first mark “whose perspective” it represents.
- Distinguish intention from appearance — the meaning of behavior depends on subjective intention, not external display.
- Acknowledge multiple versions — the same event, seen from different roles, will generate different structures.
This stance-based way of expression is not a denial of the objective existence of the world, but an emphasis that:
what we can access is always reality refracted through subjectivity.
If we fail to recognize this, every discussion of human behavior will fall into confusion.
The value of structural language lies precisely here:
it enables us, in complex interpersonal and social relations, to clearly distinguish and present different subjective perspectives in parallel—
instead of being forced into the illusion of a single “objective truth.”