Well, I think it’s possible to approach to some degree. For example: I can expand the questions to include a purpose: a “for [what / whom]?” How does this moment exist [for me]? How does this moment exist [to itself]? How does physics exist [for me]? How does physics exist [for itself]? Can this moment exist [without me]? Can physics exist [without me]? What started everything [for me]? What started everything [for itself]?

Well, I think it’s possible to approach to some degree.
For example: I can expand the questions to include a purpose: a “for [what / whom]?”
How does this moment exist [for me]?
How does this moment exist [to itself]?
How does physics exist [for me]?
How does physics exist [for itself]?
Can this moment exist [without me]?
Can physics exist [without me]?
What started everything [for me]?
What started everything [for itself]?
[According to (ideology)] how did everything begin or was everything always here?
What does “According to (ideology)” mean?
What is “According” ?
What is “an accord?”
Noun: an official agreement or treaty.
Verb:
1) give or grant someone (power, status, or recognition).
2) (of a concept or fact) be harmonious or consistent with.
So my modified question has become:
How can I answer these questions so that they are harmonious with my own sense of correctness?
—-
Then I can ask: “Can I answer these questions in a way that will be harmonious withs own sense of correctness?”
Thus begins communication.
===

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


+ 7 = fourteen

Leave a Reply