Guest guest Posted November 25, 1999 Report Share Posted November 25, 1999 >>Greg: <snip> >By retaining the notion of brains that are external to each other but both on the inside, he's *assuming* the reality of physical objects, and the reality of the inside/outside distinction. But these things are just what he's trying to establish. The inside/outside distinction is nothing more than a convenient, conventional thing, and can't bear too much intense philosophical scrutiny. The border between the inside and outside is usually thought to be the skin. Dan: Your benevolent clarity knows no bounds, Gregji. This "simple" little "pointing" of yours demolishes much illusion. How often have I attempted to make sense of "outside" events from an "inside" perspective, when I could have, instead, looked to how real is the distinction between inside/outside. How often have I read the words, without reading the space between the words. How often have I spoken without noticing the silence as I spoke. Inside and outside - these are in all words, all concepts, all perceptions. They are mutually referenced ways of providing location and relationship. There is no ultimate defining boundary between inside and outside, it shifts depending on the point of view. Peace to you Gregji - you are not outside of me, this I know! Neither would I confine you by placing you inside of me! Your words make a palatable meal - wonderful to digest. Now, have I have taken them in from outside or produced them myself? - I can't say. -- love -- Dan Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.