[What is to be found in the thought experiment3a?
The thought experiment3a is the content-level normal context.
Like the system…3a in parole, the thought experiment3a seems to be referential.
We project referentiality into the thought experiment.
But, it also exists as a symbolic order.
The system…3a sets the normal context for the potentiation of …differences1a.
Parole2a exists as a system of differences3a-1a.]
[Have I arrived at another way to speculate about responsibility (in virtue) and words (in sin)? ]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[Does the thought experiment where ‘I choose something’ have both referential and symbolic character, just like the symbolic order of parole?
Does the potential inherent in me1a compare to my potential of using manual brachial gestures for hand talk1a, consisting of a finite and habitual suite of different possibilities.]
[For hand talk, a system of gesturing and seeing3 brought parole2a into relation with the potential of a finite number of different habitual manual brachial gestures1a.
The mirror of the world3a compares to the system3a in a system3a of differences1a.
A thought experiment that everyone in the group is participating in3a acts like gesturing and seeing3a.
Similarly, the potential inherent in me1a parallels the potential of a set of finite and habitual different features (comparable to the manual brachial gestures in hand talk)1a.
Something2a compares to parole2a, the utterance.]
[Now, I want to compare something2a to parole2a.
Parole2a is the actuality in the content level of the system of differences of language.
The nested form is:
A system…3a( parole2a( …of differences1a))]
Summary of text [comment] page 83
[In virtue, I take my responsibilities and freedom for granted.
My responsibility corresponds to mirror of the world3a(something2a(___1a)).
My freedom corresponds to __3a( something2a( potentials of me1a)).
In sin, I take my words and my bondage for granted.]
[What is this mirror3a that I am obligated to engage whenever ‘I choose something’?
It is a source of reflectivity that I always seem to ignore.
It reflects the perspective level, the Zeitgiest, in a highly personal manner.]
[So I pray (or think about it).
The interscope becomes an intersection.
The non-contemplative acts.
The contemplative prays.]
[My choice2b can validate the expectations in the report3a.
My friend’s report3a expects to arouse my desire1a.
If I make a choice2b, I validate the thought experiment3a, even if it turns out that there are no good apples at the market.
Then I do2b something foolish.
I purchase undesirable apples at a high price.]
