The subject is the source of free activity, as opposed to the object that does not have free activity.
The subject is not always the man, and the man is not always the subject. The subject of entrepreneurial activity can be an organization, and the person on the surgeon’s operating table can be the object of his medical manipulations.
In academic psychology, the term «subject», «subjectivity» is popular, and the concept of «author», «author’s position» is less common. There is a feeling that these concepts are very close, sometimes they are used as synonyms. How do these concepts really relate? The author of his life is always the subject, but it seems that not every subject is in a responsible, authorial position. The subject can be both the author and the victim; he can choose both the position of the Victim and the position of the Author.
Subjectivity is the ability to be a subject, to be a source of activity, to be a cause. A person with high subjectivity sees himself as big and strong, having the ability to change life, the world and himself. Will the subject, however, always behave as if it were big and strong, making itself the cause? Not at all. Free people sometimes choose bondage if it is easier or if it is better paid for, as a result of which the line of internal activity looks like: Object — Victim — Subject — Author.
The subject has the right to his point of view — to his subjectivity. Sometimes it’s a virtue, sometimes it’s a problem. Freedom is a source not only of creativity, but also of abuse. When the activity of the subject is free, but still understood by others, we speak of subjectivity. If the subject is marked by such a unique and creative approach that causes misunderstanding among others, one speaks of subjectivism. The line between subjectivity and subjectivism is thin and not always clearly perceptible; sometimes it is a matter of proportion, sometimes it is a matter of the adequacy of others and their ability to understand a unique personality.