--- In Wittrs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, Joseph Polanik <jPolanik@...> wrote: > suppose you imagine yourself in a high alpine meadow on a sunny day > discussing philosophy with a blue unicorn. is that a case of knowing? (I > would say 'no'.) is that a case of experiencing? (I would say 'yes'). > > hence, knowing is a subset of experiencing. I can along with this: We can be immersed in the immediacy of experience without reflection, on the one hand. On the other, we can recognize that we are having a conversation with a blue unicorn, be puzzled, alarmed, and yet feel that something came of it. Let's see how close I am to you. 1- For me, there is a psychological state in which we are cognizant of being a person, a agent who is having and manipulating this state. There are other states in which this doesn't hold. 2- One can, if wishes, as some Buddhists texts do, claim that the sense of agency is an illusion and that the enlightened state is "thoughts without a thinker." bruce ========================================= Need Something? Check here: http://ludwig.squarespace.com/wittrslinks/