> you know i cannot do that, so why are you asking me to do it.
Know I don't. How can you know what I don't know, or even what I do know. 
All we can know is that we can both communicate via this list.

>> as i said in some other reaction in this thread: object is, by 
>> definition,
>> everything which is recognizable by us. your car is an object because the
>> concepts we recognize we call objects. similarily for house and atoms.
"Recognizable by us" presumes a common existential history, what if I was 
brought up in a cave on a mountain top and have never seen a car. I have 
*never* seen an atom. I have seen a *picture* if some atoms that were 
arranged to form the letters IBM, but that was just printed in a book.

[snip]

> let's make some extensions:
> - by replacing the word "textual" in the above paragraph by "pictorial", 
> we
> can for example say that there are imaginery objects (like feelings) which
> cannot be expressed by depicting them (although artists try to paint 
> feelings
> sometimes) (note: read for example bergson's "time and free will: an 
> essay on
> the immediate data of consciousness" which somewhat deals with 
> communication
> of personal feelings).
Have you just read this recently?


> have i won the challenge ? send me the price in case i did.
>
OK, the price is -$ 1000.00, I'll update your account if you give me the 
details ;-)

Sean
*8-)