The metaphysics of subjectivity permeates and constantly bombards our everydayness from the formal, educational, and judicial to the most informal spheres. In his1952 letter Einstein said that this was a period of such great external and internal insecurity and with such a lack of firm objectives that one should come out of the inner shell of subjectivity (with the corresponding lack of guarantee that this inner shell delivers) and speak out inner truths. To Einstein both the subjective and the objective were equally shaking. Still Einstein spoke from a metaphysics of subjectivity and therefore could not make it past the metaphysical barrier of the subject. This is something that both formal and informal spheres keep obviating as common sense tells us that it is of course true that there are two truths, i.e., subjective and therefore private truths, and objective and therefore eternal or real truths. The question for Einstein was: how is the scientist to seek truth? From here, Einstein spoke of the current situation of the scientist. Here I ask the question in its reverse form: how does truth seek us? How does truth stand with us? Even the saying "speak your truth" has become common now. But this saying still sees truth as the private property of the owner that can share but still own. In an interview between Jordan Peterson and Donald Hoffman on the nature of reality both, particularly Hoffman, emphasized the relative arbitrariness of the axioms upon which formal theories stand. Still, in such deep considerations on the nature of reality, neither subjectivity nor objectivity were questioned as the axioms upon which modern science stands. Even rejecting objectivity is a possibility only once the search for truth as objectivity has already settled. Furthermore, in these theories the subject is still the judge of the objective by postulating "views", "opinions" or "perspectives". This is in contrast to "thrownness", i.e., finding oneself thrown amidst what there is.

The metaphysical tradition maintains the language of subjectivity and objectivity as a residue of a theology that feeds from human concern. The beginning, and therefore also the result of the search within the metaphysics of subjectivity, is therefore "original", i.e., a philosophy initiated and feeding from the connection between Being and human existence. A connection based on "concern" (Heidegger 1960)[1], a concern that is neither neutral, subjective nor objective but rooted in anxiety in the face of existence. The appeal to ethical theories, or an ethical framework for science and technology, in both science and the judicial system is also rooted in the illusion that science, through its neutrality and objectivity, is freely moving in a direction that is independent of human existence. When we believe that we are thinking, our thinking emanates from the history of philosophy, a philosophy that has already interpreted the world for us. We are the end product of the history of philosophy, and for this reason, our concern with reason, i.e., ratio and calculation as much as talking about subjectivity, objectivity, and fact, is entangled with a metaphysical conception of world. The current and common unattractiveness of theories, ideologies and the "subjective" also results in contempt toward "philosophy" when in fact we are all following a metaphysical tradition. Nobody wants to philosophize, not because philosophy is confusing or meaningless but rather because we are incapable of it. When the human being speaks, and indeed in and through all its doing and busyness, the metaphysical tradition speaks. The split of truths itself is a metaphysics of truth that veils and obstructs the path to thinking.