> Would you object similarly to my saying that strawberries objectively taste better than poo?
Yes.
> How is there, for example, any such thing as a good/great chef, one being better than another, if it's all just 'subjective'?
“good” and “great” are invariably either relative to some specific purpose or subjective.
> It's proverbial that there's no arguing about taste (in the broader sense), but it's also a commonplace that nothing else is worth arguing about.
I disagree with the second half. It's sometimes worth arguing to the point of determining that the source of disagreement is a fundamental difference in taste (or, say, root moral principles, which aren't really that different from a logical point of view.) But once you've reached that point, there is no further use in arguing.
Yes.
> How is there, for example, any such thing as a good/great chef, one being better than another, if it's all just 'subjective'?
“good” and “great” are invariably either relative to some specific purpose or subjective.
> It's proverbial that there's no arguing about taste (in the broader sense), but it's also a commonplace that nothing else is worth arguing about.
I disagree with the second half. It's sometimes worth arguing to the point of determining that the source of disagreement is a fundamental difference in taste (or, say, root moral principles, which aren't really that different from a logical point of view.) But once you've reached that point, there is no further use in arguing.