Speculation is fictional at its root. I participate in it but
   always aware of its fictional nature, from thought experiments
   to movies to what if's and wherever they're found. Impersonal is
   a style of communication but I do not believe it holds
   ontological value. I speak in the subjective because it is the
   only thing I can give some semblance of validity to. It is me,
   my perspective, from this viewpoint. I try not to speak for the
   Universal or for all time (this is what I mean by "working for
   eternity") - but I do believe that it is valuable to determine
   pragmatic truths of a transient, practical nature. Ultimate
   things are, to me, fictional and subject to change and found in
   many human systems that have pragmatic and social value. ==
   Truth is generally of a consensus nature. You say there is a
   deep inversion of subjective and objective but I do not see
   objectivity-as-fixed. It is pragmatic to act "as-if" it is fixed
   for the purposes of getting things accomplished, just as logic
   is practical, formal discourse is practical. But something that
   is useful makes it a contingent truth. I do not have absolute
   truth. Perhaps you do. Perhaps your sources do. Perhaps logic
   is. I don't know. I am a systems thinker. I think in terms of
   systems. Logic is a system among other systems and is functional
   and useful for its purposes, but I do not utilize it as a
   basis-for-truth except truth that is considered truth from
   within the confines of its system. Outside of its system? I care
   if it's practical or not. If it's not practical, then it is
   speculative fiction. ==