Anything 'distinguishable' must be distinguishable from self.
2006-09-24 18:21:51 · 12 answers · asked by The Knowledge Server 1 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Other - Science
Discernment relies upon perception and perception relies upon discernment. You cannot have one without the other. This could be called a primary duality based upon a singular boundary.
2006-09-25 03:27:21 · answer #1 · answered by Richard 7 · 70⤊ 0⤋
The right one is: Nothing is distinguishable from self
(If anything is distinguishable from self, then where's the uniqueness of it ?)
2006-09-25 11:19:38 · answer #2 · answered by Innocence Redefined 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Sorry, I couldn't distinguish the answer
2006-09-25 01:26:08 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Hi. 'Distinguishable' implies a uniqueness. Two trees, faces, snowflakes, hairstyles are 'distinguishable'.
2006-09-25 01:27:26 · answer #4 · answered by Cirric 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
You're using the same word to 'define' itself. If you are explaining the word "distinguishable", you must use another word to explain what it means.
2006-09-25 01:30:14 · answer #5 · answered by julie_s2 1 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I became distinguished when I turned grey .......
2006-09-25 05:54:38 · answer #6 · answered by andyoptic 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
how can it be distinguishable from itself if thats what it is
2006-09-25 01:29:53 · answer #7 · answered by gomonkeebutt 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
If a 'thing' is indistinguishable from 'self', then you won't even perceive it as part of the 'external' world that we lightheartedly call 'reality' âº
Doug
2006-09-25 04:00:41 · answer #8 · answered by doug_donaghue 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Nothing. The statement is correct is logically & grammatically.
2006-09-25 01:31:30 · answer #9 · answered by Robin 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I do not see anything wrong.
2006-09-25 01:26:27 · answer #10 · answered by blessed_one_male 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
I dont know you tell me
2006-09-25 01:23:38 · answer #11 · answered by enano 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋