so you see you are deluding yourself if you think you are apprehending
anything you could call a "whole earth".... there is no such thing you are
apprehending.... nothing but your prejudicial delusion.

You may say it exists "in principal".... but I would go on to ask you how
you know that and how you would prove that... I would also ask you -what-
you know and -what- it is you are asserting exists...... furthermore, I
would remind you that you misapprehend or fail to apprehend this "whole
earth" you postulate as existing 'in principal'.... and that you never
will..... and finally I will say that your "in principle" = your
misapprehension... and that if anything exists outside of that it cannot be
known and consequently nothing ever will be able to rightly be called a
"whole earth"

so this "whole earth" of yours amounts to nothing more then a misconstrued
and superficial phantom of your imagination.

If no whole earth can be known... then the concept makes no sense and has no

On Thu, Jul 7, 2011 at 1:23 AM, B Soroud <> wrote:

> "What do you believe in then?  I thought it was the phenomenal world, but
> the above sounds like immaterialism or solipsism."
> I am neither a immaterialist nor a solipsist... don't try to conveniently
> label me. I wouldn't call myself a phenomenalist per se..... but if anything
> I highly value the human experience in the aesthetical and existential sense
> as far superior or more valuable and real (to me) relative to all
> cosmological view-points.... i think any totalizing view-point essentially
> kills actual existence.... it snuffs it right out.... obscures it out of
> sight devalues it. We kill the earth, to find nothingness in the heavens.
> (this is debatable, and we can continue debating)
> "For what evidence or reason do you postulate the only universe that exists
> is the one you happen to be in?  Is this not a little chauvinistic?"
> The only thing that matters is my personal experience as a mortal local
> being and the value I derive from it.... not some far off speculative
> pseudo-conception or mind-game.... mind-games are cool, I just don't take
> them that seriously... or at least not the particular one you presented.
> "Earth is my delusion?  Please provide some more explanation or
> justification for what you mean by this."
> I mean there is no Earth you are aware of that is absolutely apprehended
> and comprehended in some fixed and objective and ultimate form.... all you
> have is your own puny and distorted idea or point-of-view about something
> unknowable.
> In other words, no one has actually seen the "whole earth".... and no one
> ever will.
> Perhaps Gorgias was in some way right, when he asserted:
>    1. Nothing exists;
>    2. Even if something exists, nothing can be known about it; and
>    3. Even if something can be known about it, knowledge about it can't be
>    communicated to others.
>    4. Even if it can be communicated, there is no incentive to do so.
> I think this is very interesting and not entirely empty.

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at

Reply via email to