Becoming human is a task that we must all undertake. We are born with a blank page, the paper being our genetic construct, and the words thereafter being what we perceive. As we grow, the paper gets filled quicker than one can account for analytically, and even the intuitive masters of chaos have difficulty with their control tactics.
We must trust ourselves by studying the paper after it has been filled, and by filing that paper in the proper compartment. A lack of organization can be deconstructive to the overall output, though minor inefficiencies are often too far under the radar to notice. Filing a paper in the proper compartment can release a person from the eternal struggle-by being organized, one can handle more papers and the flow will begin to normalize.
After we learn by receiving objectively and ordering subjectively, we have the opportunity to re-output information at any rate we choose. Outputting information is more difficult than inputting information, but is a more effective means to learning when one is in the presence of those who know more. When a person is in the presence of those who do not know, or those who for some reason seek to manipulate, it is wise to develop a protocol for any given interaction.
There are absolute protocols that may be followed. There are protocols that can be lesser priorities, though all should be equal to each other given lack of time constraints. For instance, one must be proper at all times. One never knows when their judgment is lacking, and should always be perceiving even when making temporary judgments. Judgments should always be temporary, as a means of communication, but when not communicating judgments should be non-existent.
Once a person becomes aware that there are a variety of protocol at their disposal, and that there are a plethora of priority levels to choose from, they begin to realize that they can decompartmentalize information and release the flow to a suitable level. A higher flow necessitates a larger amount of energy, and a consistent and efficient usage of that energy. This stage of development can be described as machining.
A person constructs a full cycle of thought, one which assimilates energy and outputs energy at the same rate, and then uses that cycle to perform routine tasks. Non-routine tasks need further consideration, and usually require an addition to the cycle, or a construct of an adjacent machine. Running dual processes more than halves efficiency, but it can be done if necessary.
To maximize efficiency, one should construct a single cycle, and not rely on multiple cycles- which can heavily detriment the efficiency of the thought process. Once developed, a person should complete the cycle by implementing a self-checking protocol which analyzes the flow as it is cycled. Such an analytical process becomes the definition of objectivity, and the flow of the cycle remains the subjective. As I have said, both are required. One for doing, and one for checking what is done. It is by this reasoning that objectivity and subjectivity must combine to complete a whole algorithm of thought. Claims made that either one or the other should take precedence should not be made. Logically, both should be harmonious.