Summary of text [comment] page 88

[The interscope works when ‘my attention’ seamlessly selects a particular item that specular scatters light. In other words, my situational attention_3b directs my neurophysiological potential_1a towards a content level something_2a. This is the only way for a thing to emerge from and situate my neurological potentials.

I, seat of sight_3b, virtually emerges from and situates the origin and the nature of the illumination_3a. Under typical conditions, I do not even notice the ‘I see’ nested form_b. I unhesitatingly attend to something_2a.]

[I, seat of sight₃, brings my attention₂ into relation with the possibilities inherent in ‘light specular scattering from the surface of something stimulating my neurophysiological potential’₁.

A light source₃ brings some thing that actually specular scatters photons₂ into relation to my visual neurophysiological potential₁.

These two nested forms may interscope or intersect.]

Summary of text [comment] page 88

[Let me reconsider a natural analogy:

With a light source, ‘I see something’.

As before, there are two actualities: ‘I see’ and ‘the something that I see’.]

Summary of text [comment] page 88

[Here are the two nested forms:

‘I, seat of choice₃’ brings ‘my choice₂’ into relation to the ‘possibilities inherent in something₁’.

‘The thought experiment₃’ brings ‘something₂’ into relation to ‘the possibilities inherent in me₁.]

[The thought experiment defines the normal context on the content level of two interscoping nested forms.

I, seat of choice, defines the normal context on the situation level of two interscoping nested forms.]