On Fri, 23 May 2003 10:03:14 +0000, Sean Charles wrote
> > 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.

it seems to me that you have been brought up there .... :)

> 
> > 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?
> 

yes. why do you ask?

> > 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-)