This is A Facebook User's Typepad Profile.
Join Typepad and start following A Facebook User's activity
Join Now!
Already a member? Sign In
A Facebook User
Recent Activity
Does x in #1 equivocate between existing object and representation (intentional object)? Then may the difference between denying #1 and #3 depend on the assumed relation of the noumen kind of object and the phenomenal object? Restating without the aporeticism and using "representation" for intentional object: 1. If S sees an existing x, then x is represented to S 2. Seeing is an of a representation of an object 3. Every representation of what exists is incomplete. 4. Nothing that exists is incomplete.
Here's the original article text, a review by some of the theory's proponents:
Kids like to eat sweets and carbs, and if it were not for that, this ketogenic diet treatment would be used a lot more.
A Facebook User is now following The Typepad Team
May 1, 2012