On the consistent use of "objective" and "subjective"

[Whateverist]

I've seen these terms (objective and subjective) thrown around in many different ways. I am surprised when the two terms are placed in opposition. So I thought we could discuss a possible common understanding moving forward.

---

1. SUBJECTIVELY AND OBJECTIVELY

Everyone here is a subject. 

You as subject: All of YOUR personal judgments, affect, intentions, opinions, etc. form your SUBJECTIVE experience of OBJECTS.

EVERYTHING is an object, including all of you.

Objects are the things, real or otherwise, about which your personal judgments, affect, intentions, opinions, etc. can be made.

To speak about things "SUBJECTIVELY" means to speak about objects in the context of a particular subject's or subjects' experience of objects acting.

To speak about things "OBJECTIVELY" means an attempt to speak about objects in the context of the way in which an object's or objects' act (which would include those acts which do not elicit experiences in subjects)

Objectivity is an attempt to speak about objects without the "bias" "fallibility" or "individuality" of subjective human experience, even while being based upon the subjective experience of humanity itself.

2. SUBJECTIVE REALITY AND OBJECTIVE REALITY

[u]Objects[/u] act on subjects causing experiences in the subject. 

Subjects may also act on objects eliciting new acts from the object, and therefore new experiences in the subject.

Any experience in a subject IS a subjective reality.

The objects causing these experiences may or may not be real.

To speak about "subjective reality" means that the subjective experience about which we speak is real.

To speak about "objective reality" means that the object about which we speak is real.

e.g. To say "an objective morality exists" is to say that there is one real object which causes the varied and subjective human experience of morality.

To say "no objective morality exists" is to say that there is no object causes the subjective human experience of morality.

To say "there is not 'true' or 'superior' morality" is to say either that many objects cause different subjective human experience, or that the subjective human experience of morality (whatever causes it) is itself the object of morality.

---

Bravo! That is some excellent analysis well communicated. I happily sign on to these definitions going forward. Are there any conclusions I am likely to win in so doing?