CobaltBlue, tell me please if this is the Cobe penni referred to, I will consciously avoid contention, just toss a few balls in the air, ok?
I have put two value systems on the table. Propriety and Proprietary. One fairly ephemeral, the other specifically attached to matter or nonmatter.
Your postscript post, about ownership as the eldest of five, falls completely in the Proprietary camp. I will say <VBG> to that. (I have never used one of those smiley-type things before, and am not confident that I did it the right way here.) I mean you would not hesitate to agree the postscript was fully a Mine Mine Mine sort of thing, would you?
Ok, to the first post: I find it entirely in the Proprietary camp. If you parse it by sentence and phrase, I believe you will readily admit that it deals with the - and here comes the second set of balls-in-the-air - much more, if not entirely, Concrete, as contrasted with Conceptual. The specific items of sharing and the physical or Proprietary nature of the sharing that is considered.
Let me start with the most obvious. If 'sharing' were the MO of most of us, I would gladly share my Olga Hero with Donald Trump because he would be operating on the same principle, and would be sharing his shit with me.
Please admit that the above example applies the conceptual to the concrete - and produces an entirely different situation when this is done.
I will not labor you through a step-by-step ordeal of this switching of focuses. You see, I could, with no difficulty, say that a Christian is a Pagan; that a Jew is a Muslim; and so on. By defining their conceptual essences. What do they do (in general terms)? They follow their beliefs. Why do they do this? Because they believe their beliefs, as understood by them, are the right beliefs, the accepted beliefs, the beliefs that have been written for them by their systems. Ad infinitum.
This becomes drudgery for you, I'm sure, but if you take the Proprietary or Concrete aspects out of the composition of the Contradictory Couplings you have listed, will you admit the underlying elements are close to being IDENTICAL?
The 'paths' you mention. Are they different? Or are they all different Proprietary versions of the same path.
Cobalt, I know exactly what I am saying. I have a dread that thread communication makes the depths shallow in our speed to pass through, or get over, them. And, I am not pontificating or preaching - because that would involve absolute statements of black or white. Gray. That's what it seems to be. Everything, when you step back a bit - and toss all the words that are capitalized overboard.
Why do I feel apologetic everytime I finish a silly post like this?
May your well-being remain well,
geo
PS: As a personal final note of fury, I never should have removed that goddamned cotton ball! g. |
