On 8/8/2012 2:31 PM, Platonist Guitar Cowboy wrote:

    So, according to you, we're always wrong to deny the existence of anything 
    to do so brings it into existence.  We can't even have a clear conception 
of it
    without affirming its existence.  I suppose that will find adherents on 
    called the "Everything" list, but think it's just intellectual mush.

No, on your first statement. I clearly stated in the last post, that it's tricky navigating between tendencies to believe/entrance/enthrall ourselves and denial/amnesia. Because of this, a clear conception that you rightfully demand, cannot be sacrificed: what happened in so called "fascist" governments? What is happening "war on drugs, prohibition etc."? I consider these to be highly fruitful questions in the sense of studying a paradox, but I refuse to position myself relative to their obvious absurdity in a "are you for or against" sense.

Sure, they exist and of course we should study them. But in so doing we invariably have to navigate tricky terrain between our capacity to entrance ourselves/reification and denial, because we will believe or disbelieve to some degree in order for a clearer conception to emerge. For any observer after observation nothing's void of belief to some degree. People tend to call them, using evasive maneuver, "working hypothesis" in their papers, dissertations etc. but this denial of belief implies the same spectrum. Otherwise belief has to be subject to time constraints, which is of course nonsense.

OK, so is there anything that *doesn't* exist?


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

Reply via email to