Yeah, this pretty much simplifies it even enough for the rationalists to get the point fairly objectively. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dialectic_of_Enlightenment
I would disagree that it is subjective. I am sure it can be quantified, even if we cannot do so yet. Why do I say that? All of your emotions/thoughts/feelings/desires/etc... are simply chemical processes occurring in your brain. It is physical, and as such, should certainly be quantifiable. The clues as to why people do what they do are in their DNA and Environment. At least, that is my take on that.
Those are external clues. The internal clues are important because those deal with how we react/respond to those external clues. That part we can never measure on the same scale, clearly.
word, our "advancement" is not only forward steps. . with all the new revelations we have made, more and more are we forgetting the basic tools inherent in us as we're born. instead we choose to replace what is inherent with what we percieve as necessary, or perhaps mandated. interesting. . .
Like, the thoughts you and I have are so abstract we can't line them up with our simple "me" perception.
Okay, in scientific terms, you have a stimulus. You have perceivers of this stimulus. You have subjective (individual) responses to this stimulus (based on relative and perceived separation/distance/location). Communication about the stimulus between perceivers is not the stimulus! Thus, the closest understanding of the stimulus is, in the end, you. There are so many "you"s out there, often thinking they are always right on the surface, but deep down understanding that they are not. The reality is in the abstract. I don't know exactly how to link this in words, but it is comparable to the worth of imaginary numbers in math. Comparable to that concept of i representing a concept we don't even acknowledge as being possible to exist.