Dear Bruno, you (and as I guess: others, too) use the
subject phrase. Does it make sense?
Reality is supposed to be something independent from
our personal manipulations (=1st person
interpretation) and so it has got to be objective,
untouched by our experience and emotions. Eo ipso it
is not subjective.
Once we 'subject' it to our personal 'mind' and its
own distortions it is "subjective", not objective
So it looks like "subjective reality" is an oxymoron.
I understand if you (all) use the phrase as the
'imagined' and 'acceptable' version of something we
CAN handle in our feeble minds. I would not call THAT
a 'reality'. It seems to be a 'virtuality' as
generated (even if only in modifications if you
insist) WITHIN our mind, subject to our personal
mental structure and content.
I am not ashamed to say: I dunno, but it seems to
in wich case I separated 'it' from any 'reality'.
(the bartender, talking into the patrons' discussion)