[FRIAM] Eternal questions

[Steve Smith]

uǝlƃ ☤>$
> Ouch! Dude. No! 8^D You're committing the same sin Nick commits. 
I understand that I was being provocative with the specific formulation
"we ARE" as if it were an absolute.
> To say we "are" our emotions ignores the composition, the algebra by which parts compose the whole.
I agree and only wanted to add to the composition "are" along with
"have" and "act-out" .
> The point is the very high order conscious *attention* to lower order frequencies. Not all is one. There are many parts to organize. How are they organized?

To what extent are our identities/sense-of-self (inner experience and
outer presentation) the superposition of our "emotions"?   yes, we are
more and less than that, yet for some purposes it seems we ARE that.