Linked actually from:
	* HusserlsPhenomenology

InterSubjectivity acts when two observers interact, exchanging the content of their observations, with the use of a communication protocol, e.g. the language, and with this both prove themselves as members of a community.

The question that could and should be made in this context is: ''How can the subjects (observers) communicate themselves and get into common agreement (common action) about the use of concepts and sentences about one object?''

Explanation: we, humans, since the birth, stay learning concepts, that then will fit with the observations that we make. With every new word learned, we also learn how to view the thing that this word represents. In this learning process we finish learning some words quite right, i.e. the word will have exactly the same meaning (object represented) for us and for the primordial observer (e.g. parents), and some words we learn will have completely different (and new) meaning (object represented). For example, what means the word Intelligence? At first we both can delude ourselves that we exactly represent the same object with that word, but usually we don't.

So, in our society there is certainly thousands of observers talking and using the same set of words (the same language), but any word will almost ever have a subtle different meaning between any two different observers.

And, when one observer tries to exchange experience with another observer, by the use of the language, the first observer will first find one concept in the language that best represents the object, and then pass a message to the listener. This will try to fit the concept received with one other concept that is existent, usually is that one that uses the same word in the context observed (this word not necessarily represents the same object).

And this is basically the problem of subjectivity. 

-- ViniciusCubasBrand

Seems to be related to AutoPoiesis