Now we are starting to get into contentious territory. Sartre wants to claim that what we see is objective. Usually the product of experience is considered subjective. For example when I see a quilt I might describe it as a blue quilt, but someone else might say it is aqua, or if they were colour blind that it was grey. So colour is usually considered subjective. What Sartre is saying is that what I see is objective, that the quilt seen with my eyes, under a certain light, at a certain angle is blue, and that what I see is an accurate representation of the world as it is at that moment, under specific conditions. I am not so sure. I don’t think that he is wrong, actually I think he is spot on, I think what I am objecting to is the use of the word objective. For some reason when I think of the word objective I think of replicable results. A measurement of something might be objective. While we may all look at the quilt from the same angle, under the same light and still disagree about the colour, if we all measure the quilt with the same tape measure we should all come up with the same dimensions. The difference I think is that for me my eyes are part of me as subject, where as under Sartre’s view my eyes are a part of the world.