On ''what there is''

Nandric,
I have to assume that your posts on this thread are a practice in personal vanity, since you must know that you are flying high above the heads of most readers including myself regarding the writers and philosophers that you are referencing. (excluding mahgister)
I think that it's far more effective to distill a point clearly in layman's terms than to use arcane references and even equations. ( ''for all x Fx& Gx'')
I understand, you're smarter and more well read than me, but stop grandstanding and say something.
By the way, in English it's did, not deed. Gee, I knew something you didn't know after all...

Whatever crazy and hard to follow stuff there is on this thread, I'll take it any day over conspiracy theories, racism, sexism, and science denialism. There's a fun and spirited play of ideas here -- with no malice or mean intent. It's a bit of a crazy ball-room of ideas and intellectual riffing, but life is short.

Ain't your bag? Click your mouse and poof! it's gone.

@nandric, I have several Russian patients. They bring me Sturgeon and it is almost time for winter borsht (with sour cream and herring.)

I am also an atheist. My problem with a universal god is that he would have to have a very strange sense of humor. He would also have to be a white guy that spoke English. 

Chakster and rauliruegas have their biases but they generally have the physical science involved correct which makes their opinion valuable even if you do not agree with their bias.

For many, choices in audio are emotional. They should be practical. For me it is not "what there is" but, Why there is. 

Having knowledge is wonderful but what can you do? I am dyslexic. Philosophy was consequently, not one of my strong subjects. 

“It depends on what the meaning of the word ‘is’ is. If the—if he—if ‘is’ means is and never has been, that is not—that is one thing. If it means there is none, that was a completely true statement. … Now, if someone had asked me on that day, are you having any kind of sexual relations with Ms. Lewinsky, that is, asked me a question in the present tense, I would have said no. And it would have been completely true.”

Bill Clinton

To recap: OP says his theme "sounds philosophical," which it does, but turns out he's simply praising the collective knowledge generated by the forum. Given that several powerful minds hang out around here, we went quickly to metaphysics, material physics, symbolic logic. Along the way I listened to the whole masterly Watts performance for the first time in years. Well, that's metaphysical, or purports to be. Doesn't strike me as "religious," though he uses the word "spiritual," which I take to mean not supernatural but noumenal: a projection of essence generated inductively. What more he may be claiming I can't tell, as he never answers the question "therefore what?" His chosen aperture, the question "what am I," seems hopelessly anthropocentric, but is saved by the answer "I/you/intelligent life am/are/is among innumerable inevitabilities of a physical universe having an infinite time span." 

Thanks to the several large minds for their learned digressions. I'm just happy knowing that when I wonder "what cartridges exist?," there's a place I can go to find out.