well, "everything in general and nothing in particular" does make some sense to me, I admit. With "patronizing" I did not mean anything you or anybody else on this list have written, but the rhetorical move of some esoterians, to say you have to follow their way of thinking (or not thinking) and their gurus, and some time later you will understand. Like humble obeying as a path to wisdom, like a haiku, a paradoxon or an antinomy you must accept instead of solve it, something like that. There is a story of a Zen-master who hits his pupil with a cane towards enlightement, in the Baghavad-Gita there is a war with many casualities in the duty of enlightement, Fakirs sit on nails for it, or cease to eat, and in the Bible there is the story about Hiob. It has nothing to do with you or Peirce or this list. I also did not mean to pin you on something you merely have mentioned (the Egyptian myth of Atum). Indeed by explaining the combination of all and nothing with everything in general and nothing in particular has showed me, that it is not a total antinomy as I had thought. But "in general" and "in particular" are both relativations of the concepts "all" and "nothing". A nothing with possibilities is not an absolute nothing, and an "everything in general" is not a complete everything, it lacks the concretenesses a real everything should contain too.
----------------------------- PEIRCE-L subscribers: Click on "Reply List" or "Reply All" to REPLY ON PEIRCE-L to this message. PEIRCE-L posts should go to peirce-L@list.iupui.edu . To UNSUBSCRIBE, send a message not to PEIRCE-L but to l...@list.iupui.edu with the line "UNSubscribe PEIRCE-L" in the BODY of the message. More at http://www.cspeirce.com/peirce-l/peirce-l.htm .