Subjective Absolutization and Objectivity-Projection Theory (SAOPT)

This paper proposes the Subjective Absolutization and Objectivity-Projection Theory (SAOPT), a conceptual framework for examining how subjective experiences, perceptions, ideals, ideologies, values, conceptual understandings, and other person-relative reference frames may influence judgment and become represented as claims of absolute, exclusive, or universal objectivity. The framework distinguishes ordinary subjective interpretation from the unwarranted elevation of a perspective-dependent judgment into a uniquely legitimate objective standard. It introduces the Subjectivity-to-Objectivity Absolutization Mechanism (SOAM) as a proposed process comprising default reference-frame activation, selective framing, frame-mediated interpretation, subjective-warrant substitution, objectivity-status projection, absolutization, scope-warrant divergence, confidence-warrant amplification, and resistance to counterevidence. The Standpoint-to-Absolute Projection Case (SAPC) serves as the primary analytical prototype.The proposed theoretical architecture comprises fourteen analytical layers and seven research domains. It specifies a source manifestation taxonomy, a temporal-dynamics model, operational definitions, candidate variables, a preliminary mathematical index, an alternative probabilistic model, testable hypotheses, boundary conditions, measurement requirements, falsification criteria, and a research roadmap. The framework distinguishes the psychological origin of a judgment from the epistemic adequacy of the claim subsequently made for it. Accordingly, neither subjectivity nor confidence, ideology, emotional intensity, disagreement, or error alone is treated as sufficient evidence of the proposed phenomenon.SAOPT is presented as a research proposal rather than an empirically established universal law. Its novelty, construct validity, explanatory advantage, causal interpretation, measurement properties, and cross-domain applicability remain open empirical and conceptual questions. Establishing those properties requires a systematic comparison with existing literature, independent assessment of evidential warrant, transparent operationalization, hypothesis testing, and independent replication.Keywords: Subjectivity; Objectivity Projection; Subjective Absolutization; Epistemic Warrant; Cognitive Bias; Motivated Reasoning; Epistemic Closure; Scope-Warrant Divergence; Theoretical Framework.