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?