bag8ger,
it is an unfortunate limitation of logic that we can only successfully debate the manifestations of reality. It would be so much more fun to debate the wonderful machinations and images that dwell in the privacy of an individuals own imagination.
It is fundamentaly impossible to have any 'meaningful' discussions about such things, as the very infrastructure required to support such a debate requires a shared footing in such factors as language, definitions, measurement systems and descriptions. In the case of imagined 'truth' it is never possible to agree on these concepts, as individual imaginations are governed by too many divergent forces.
One wonders what interesting conversations could result if we could all discuss such diverse subjects as 'level 4' and 'DNAP the pps'. Unfortunately such concepts dwell solely in your own special place and are not shared and or understood by anyone else. It is possible that some will pipe in with disclaimers that they 'do' share your understanding, but it will be fairly obvious after a few moments of discussion that their concepts are divergent from your own, as they will be guided by their own 'special' factors.
In closing let me say that while it is easy to deride those who wish to limit their discussions to the realm of reality, it is not necessarily fair. Everyone loves a good daydream, and quite often some version of daydreams come true. Unfortunately we never seem to hold daydreams to any kind of performance standards (lol) and when they don't eventually manifest themselves in reality (IBM deal, Malaysia, Orchid Option, $1000 Genome etc.) we just move on to the next ones and continue to deride those who can't 'see' what we can see.
regards,
frog
