Originally posted by Vanitas
But then, aren't apparent paradoxes the stuff this cosmos (I don't even dare calling it "uni-verse" any more...) is made of? ;-)
I've begun using 'macrocosmos', quantifying the unquanitfiable, with 'all that is (in relation to all that we are...I insist on limiting myself to
macrocosmos...and by 'this' I mean the macrocosmos of human creation)'.
Originally posted by Vanitas
MAYBE there is no single "common" reality.
I don't think that there is a single "common" reality, the more I look the more potential spheres I find. Some are contracting, others are
expanding. As is seemingly the way of all things. I am considering how tangible those creations are though, how reliant on the strength/potency of
the central nucleus they are for survival. Or how reliant they are on not having a relationship with the central core they are.
But (biologically speaking), all are from the same cell, originally, each one as you move farther and farther away from the nucleus, diminishes in
traits similar to the first (as with mammalian development), but all progeny of one central core, and therefore related. So although, there is one
common reality, that common reality is so diluted and removed in linear time, that we cannot necessarily perceive it. Or our perception is blocked by
external forces, a 'force field' that encloses and excludes. I can think of a number of examples of the latter.
Or so I am currently thinking. I think. Some shoes take more walking in than others don't you find?
So with this in mind, is it possibly not a matter of people disappearing, but of whether we perceive the presence or absence of those people? Or at
what point they enter our perception. Whether they cross into our individual or collectivised spheres only in absence. Maybe? If someone has many
friends and loved ones, then they will be missed and looked for. Their life is 'important', quantifiably, there is absence that is noted, possibly
in more than one sphere of awareness; family, church, school etc etc. Someone who has noone to care for them, will not be looked for. They may be
self-reliant, not a joiner, retired, many such possibles spring to mind. Either way, you can't find what you do not see. Only when that one is
joined by another 2 or 3 or twenty disappearances may the 'nobody' become of significance, by then, if they fell down a hole, got abducted by aliens
or whatever, the trail would be cold if anyone should try to follow them. They would therefore only appear to have disappeared, when in fact they had
only 'appeared' once they were absent, they had been invisible all their lives, and only now, when attached to a mystery, do they find form and can
Perhaps not as clear as I would like it to be, but as clear as I can be at this given moment, I don't pretend to understand half the things I think