You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Was it a holo-deck or a holo-sphere? (Letters 6.2)
As I said... We are diving into Religious Extasy. (For the effect of my understanding of what you mean, separate or distinguish results in the same. Maybe I just did not use the most accurate word. I didn't say divide or split, and I really wasn't trying to signify that you broke yourself into two different parts). I can now safely think about this.
Okay, you got my point on separation versus distinguishing and that's not only enough, it is important. From this point we can easily get distance from the special wording as we can be assured to point to the same.
This I did not understand.
I mean that you are pointing to experience art in the same way we experience the divine: as something meaningful without a possible translation into the rational.
Yes & No.
The seen parallel is existent,
but parallels might be misleading.
(Seems impossible by the geometric point...)
[edit]
..misleading since it is possible there are more parallels then the first one seen.
It's just a point of comparison for reflection.
Comparisons are like models - they gain influence on the reflection.
The more beautiful the model looks and the more fitting the comparison seems, the bigger is the influence - be it justified or not.
Just a point. Not a full image. :)