Objectivity as seeing ALL facts

I wanted to write about a new perspective I have on objectivity, so I thought I’d do it here! It came from asking myself why I use the term “objective” to describe my approach to such varied things as (1) setting a new tuition structure but being flexible to needs of individual families, (2) teachers setting classroom expectations but being flexible to needs of individual students, and (3) setting a rule in my house that food doesn’t leave the kitchen, but being flexible to particular circumstances. I asked myself, why do I consider myself “objective” for approaching these issues this way? And I realized it’s because in each case I’m considering ALL facts, not just a preferred set of facts. In each case, a subjectivist would only consider the facts that he feels strongest about (such the school’s financial needs) while ignoring all others (such as the parent’s financial needs). Similarly, an intrincisist would hold onto the rules or expectations (such as “food stays in the kitchen”, or “a third grader should know better than that”) like they were the word of God and never budge to individual circumstance. Both the subjectivist and the intricisist, victims to their epistemological method, blind themselves to entire swathes of facts. Whereas to be objective means to take a higher altitude position and see the entire range of facts–(1) both the financial needs of the school AND the financial needs of families; (2) both the social needs of the class AND the individual needs of each student; (3) both my own need for cleanliness and household order AND the circumstantial needs of my children. This is why I now think of being objective as seeing ALL facts.