natural

I speak of the natural world

one needs to characterize not out of truth but avoidance

the world as such is conceived in many ways

'natural' for me is something like - pre-cognition

this is only a starting point and of little help

to understand (and that is not an optional extra - rather a necessity for at least survival)- we must go beyond the presentation

and to the question of definition -

any idea of strict definition - 'essential' definition - for all its intensity and hope will only be a 'reflection on'

(a phantasm - if you will)

'ideas about' reality never quite stick never quite hold

why?

perhaps consciousness just can't get it right

some say - any idea from fundamental to superficial) contains its negation

so its the nature of the thing to never see straight

also -

it can be said - there is nothing straight to see

- but what is -

definition of this is strictly redundant

and any attempt must fail -

for a definition cannot include itself

(it is always a 'definition of ___'

for specific purposes we may need to draw some lines

any lines drawn can only be inside the world

to picture the world absolutely - objectively - one would need to be outside - a logical impossibility

(hence 'God' as so conceived is impossible - God is either in the picture or not at all - and no-one I think proposes the idea of God being limited 'in' the world - so if we are to retain the idea there is no choice - 'God' is the picture - or just another name for it - and they say what's in a name - everything - it would seem)

what we 'see' (know) we cannot definitively describe (you can't get your hands on it
all)

if it wasn't for necessity - who would try?

you just can't get past reality - or capture it - it is not an option

the illusion of explanation - of whatever kind - is a real fact of functioning human
beings

as real as any event in space-time

the point of such illusions is that they are enabling

their value is thus determined -

true or false