In the work I’m doing with development, I like to use the idea of subject-object relations to describe what might be happening in terms of meaning-making and the sense we can make from the making of meaning through the use of subject/object relations.

I’m less concerned with the level that the person appears to be at, but how they are moving among levels, whether or not the density of their memes is flexible enough that they are not bounded by narrow levels of S/O Relations, but can take perspectives on their perspectives, even if it’s fairly simple.

This ability to take a perspective on a perspective shows that while we are all subject to things in many object domains, we can "mechanically" fish ourselves out of the subjective soup from time to time and formulate an object experience or perspective.

This is particularly important when we are starting to flex through transitions of these equilibrium states noted by developmentalists.  While we are dissipative structures as living systems — organizationally closed and energetically open — how open, and how closed is key to note as we move to discover and disclose ourselves in the acceptance process.

Helpful Hint: What we are subject to, and are being had by, is different than what we hold as object, and can form a relationship with, including our own inbornness, something that we are almost always 100% subject too  However, in the process of realizing that, we can begin to objectify this process.  This is key to living consciously, or at least maturing in our lives.

Action Step:  The biggest leverage point, IMHO, is how subject we are to our inbornness, and how over time, objectifying that, actually leads us back to ourselves and the happiness program already designed into our inbornness, that often we reject, because it doesn’t fit the cultural stereotypes that we often are compelled, enrolled, or manipulated to subject ourselves too.  Can you notice?