I like phrases like "In other words" - I look for those, as I
  don't 'speak logic' and I don't get an instant "a-ha" from
  ontology/epistemology. [I know the differences yet then
  suddenly, I don't].

  "In other words,
  phenomenal things are distinguished
  not by what they are,
  but by how they*re known. "

  That's my take-away line from the article you posted. Making a
  distinction between "reputation" and "existence" is a pretty
  important thing.

  An apple is an apple because we ascribe it apple-like qualities.
  But is an apple fundamentally what we say it is?
  Maybe, but not necessarily.

  I like keeping that stuff in mind as it keeps me from getting
  cocky whenever I get wrapped up in a new "A-HA NOW I UNDERSTAND
  EVERYTHING!" moment. I have to remind myself, "Is it that way
  because it _is_ that way, or because it's reputed to be that way
  (by me)?"

You are viewing proxied material from sdf.org. The copyright of proxied material belongs to its original authors. Any comments or complaints in relation to proxied material should be directed to the original authors of the content concerned. Please see the disclaimer for more details.