Subject and object

PH: Because we know that the subject of reason rejects contradiction, we know one parameter of the modern subject.

Me: What is the definition of subject? I honestly do not know the meaning of subject in this context.

— you are not wanting to paint yourself into a corner, is what is happening.  You know exactly what I mean by the subject.  Again, if you need another authority, check the multitude of philosophers, or psychologists, or even the dictionary.  But if you need a definition: a subject is a subject of discourse.  

I honestly don’t know which definition you are using.

Here are the noun definitions (including philosophical definitions) from the Oxford Dictionary. I have put in bold the definitions which could well fit into your statement.

1. A matter, scene, etc to be discussed, described, represented, dealt with, etc
2. A person, circumstance, etc, giving rise to specified feeling, action, etc
3. Department or field of study
4. Grammar. a noun or it’s equivalent about which sentence is predicated and with which the verb agrees
5. Any person except a monarch living under a monarchy or any form of government
6. Any person owing obedience to another
7. Philosophy. Are thinking or feeling entity; the conscious mind; the ego, especially as opposed to anything external to the mind
8. The central substance or core of a thing as opposed to its attributes
9. Music. The theme of a fugue or sonata; a leading phrase or motif
10. a person of specified mental or physical tendencies
11. the part of a proposition about which a statement is made
12. (as in subject for dissection) a dead body

As you can see six of the twelve definitions here can be meant. It is especially problematic when definitions 7 and 10 have complete opposite meanings for philosophy and psychology (areas which I must almost taken into consideration when looking at polysemy in your discourse). I did not include grammar subject in bold either, since you are not a language teacher.

And here are the definitions for object.

1. A material thing that can be seen or touched
2. A person or thing to which action was feeling is directed
3. a thing sought or aimed at; a purpose
4. Grammar. A noun or its equivalent governed by an active transitive verb or by a preposition
5. Philosophy. a thing external to the thinking mind or subject
6. Derogatory. A person or thing of especially pathetic or ridiculous appearance
7. Computering. A package of information and a description of its manipulation

And the Oxford Dictionary does not include the second grammatical definition either.

Interesting that definition 1 (of normal usage) is different to the philosophical one (definition 5). Also, since the name OOO is (loosely) derived from object-oriented programming languages I cannot discount this usage (definition 7) by you either.

Do you see where my problem stems from?

You keep on assuming I am being uncooperative (obstinate is the word you keep on using). I do not have all of your definitions in my head as you keep on assuming (I have not even gotten to modern yet). I can only assume from this characteristic that you are also (I am including myself in here) fallible to other assumptions as well, and that I have to be weary of what they may be. It is the way I do my philosophy.