As I was reading Gil's route, I realised why I decided to not to go college— It's because even though I'm dying for learning psychology, as a person who leans more toward spiritualism, I find despising a LOT OF ideas that psychology creates, meanwhile finding base truth in them, it feels like most concepts are misleading on purpose according to my own perspectives and beliefs. Passing college would require you to abandon your ideals which I would never do. For an example, most of the time psychology ignores the existence of a soul and it teaches how your body creates your emotions. In my views, the body, brain creates the FUELS to present the emotions that the soul knows, not to mention that the sub-conscious is hidden for a reason and for many wild reasons, people with an extremely heavy Ni (Internal Intuition) cognitive function tends to lean towards the concept of soul much easier than towards the concept of science. As for why, in my opinion, it's because the sub-conscious (!!where Ni leans toward!!) is where the soul's processor lies or something like that. It's something that I find the truth and in college, there's no room for that because they will feed you with whatever the eyes can see but not with whatever your instincts should tell you. (At least in my country. I heavily despise objectivity because it kills many valid possibilities)
Knowledge must be subjective the same way as 'text environments' are because the same sentence can imply a thousand of (even subtly) different meanings. Including metaphorical ones. Knowledge in itself is relative, not objective.
Obviousy, objectivity is objective for a reason and there are cases when objectivity holds key solutions— but science only works with subjectivity as musch as objectivity lets it. In science, objectivity is way too dominating and the two are not in balance.