what I have argued is that we begin in the midst of reality
(and for that matter stay there and end there)
our awareness - we understand as awareness of
we are aware of the world - the world outside our consciousness
and we are aware of this awareness -
we are this - awareness of awareness
self - if the term is to mean anything is that which is aware
what that is - is another question
it is at the centre of - awareness of the outside world - and aware of awareness - the
inner world
so that - at the centre - is what we might call self
that - is a logical point
that is as much as we can say - about that
that it is - OK
what about what it is?
this question of what
is what sort of a question?
it is a question of substance
and what is this?
what does substance come down to
composition
to ask what x is composed of is to ask a substantial question
so what is consciousness - made of -
what is the self?
we can only really answer this negatively
consciousness is made of that which is not non-conscious
OK this doesn't take us too far
but it is not frivolous to make the point
that consciousness can only describe itself as what it is not
and the same is finally true of the non-conscious world
what is the world outside of consciousness made of?
that which is not conscious
so we have only logic here
only that which is - and that which is not
no substance
in a final metaphysical sense
any substantial theory of the inside or of the outside
is finally a fiction of consciousness
consciousness' answer to the unknown
or ways of dealing with the absence of substance
of grounding
for itself and for what it sees - the world outside itself
of that which exists we can only say that it exists
this is not to give it any content
content is a construction
the necessary after-thought
