Comments to XVR

There is some question as to just what is the XVR page.  Some visitors are wondering about the situation.  I read the page today and I think that there is a lot of evidence presented, and that the reader is expected to make an integral.  So, let us take a survey of the situation.

First, the distinguishing definition that prefaces the comparison of Sartre and Ponty could also refer to one of the governing rights, though on it’s way out, a Creed.  That issue is coming to a realization by both global warming and government complications.  Keep in mind that though it seems like I have spelled things out, that it is really a difficult exercise to realize that Hume has his value in support for people who would be recessively oriented rather than dominant in nature.  That should be a Huzza for Hume!!

Okay, now that the genetic issue is being discussed, I bring to the discussion differentiation of Sartre and Ponty.  And, from that passage in XVR the intended message is that Ponty’s little engine “see” is designed to see only those indiscernible objects which will never fully come into being.  Familiar? Yes.  Ponty was developing for only the most treasured events of Phenomenology.  At the time of writing XVR I realized that Ponty was not clear about what relative “see” it is that was supposed to satisfy his engine.  I reasoned, thankfully that see would not hurt me, the genetic issue made most sense when I imagined he was referring to the twenty-third chromosome; inheritance of Sexual orientation; XY.  So the reader has to read for the distinction of the Sartre and Ponty discussion.  And most notably that Ponty may have been attracted to another gene on the basis that it was controversial; the twenty-second chromosome.  A tall order for a philosopher whose best work is less than fifty pages.

From another direction, Sartre was a major person in the self actualization for people to sort of understand their seeing character.  I am really not very well learned about Sartre’s philosophy.  I do know that he must have been very patient with Ponty and served in the clutch for most of the time.  He refused his award.  I am sure he will eventually resolve his need to get that interesting psychology term for the seeing person involved in the Ponty circumstance.  Recall that Ponty was writing about Paul Cezanne.  And since the situation was that of the naturally recessing genetic disposition, Sartre remains naturally curious.  Is it a “Pay Stub?”

The question remains in the XVR page how does any of this relate to the X or the R when the passage doesn’t ever mention the basic facts that are predicating the philosophers.  I hope at the outside there is a suspicion that XVR is a correct title by intuition alone.  I am not going to worry about it.  I feel that there is enough said without having doubt about the way in which a decision such as XVR is decided.