"Sciencie poem", that sounds like a very good way of say philosophy.

The words are immensely powerful. After you express something that is always there in your head. It is a way to "immortalize" something, so to speak. That's why we have to be careful with the judgments that we made and expressed, and is for this that I always try to make it clear that "maybe I'm wrong" or that "it is not carved in stone", although I don't really believe that that works a lot.

The truth is that if you say that a person or a thing is in such a way, every time you see it you will be looking to confirm or refute that judgment.

Even this "essence" is not there as an entity, as the doctrine says, but to make one understand we need this term in order to understand all the other terms.

The Orientals say that there is no essence, they are speaking in a subjective way, in the first person, and since they can't perceive the "essence", they don't see the usefulness of the term. Westerners say that the only thing that exists is essence, they are speaking objectively, in the second person, and although they don't perceive the "essence", they refer to it as what perceive. The first say that everything changes, the second that nothing does, even so, both are right. At least I think so.

It was like a brief flash of a truth that I neither questioned nor analyzed at the time, but merely felt. At that moment I had learned that I was not myself and that I had met someone/thing absolutely foreign.

Ha, that happened to me, it's like a disconnection. Although you describe it better.

For my scale it is the other way around, I see the ancients much more intelligent than the moderns, at least in these matters.

Did it all come out in once?

Yes it did, but I forgot it. Then I tried to remember it and I could not. So I started writing it without remembering it and I remembered it little by little. In the end I remembered and I started it again.

Thanks to you for stopping by, and for the kind comment, as always, greetings.