On ''what there is''

Steamerdude and Spotcheckb, instead of voicing your feelings here about what is here, you could be doing something useful, like waxing profound over on the "What is most important, the turntable, tonearm, or cartridge?" thread.  Now there's a meaty and audiophilic way to spend your time.  Sadly, the thread has not been taken out and shot, so you still have a chance to sink your teeth into it.

Air exists, you can’t see it, but you breath it...I will leave it at that...
As far as audio, my contribution is use your "God" given ears, that is "All" that really matters....

snilf, I am the class idiot. Over there is a raging fire. Stick you hand in it and tell me if it is real or not. 

There are all kinds of rules. So ''there are rules''. Are those ''normative'' in the sense of prescribing certain  behaviour?
Are rules ''truth -functional''? That is can't they be true or false?
Can terms or concepts be true or false or are those only
some ''special kinds of sentences or statements''? There are
different kinds of rules in different ''cultures'' or countries, So
they are obviously not universal . Who determines  their
boundaries? I got all kinds of reprimands regarding implicit
stated rules. Those then are assumed to be ''natural''? Are
people programmed with them  together with native language
and its grammar which is also ''loaded'' with rules? Can all
statements be put in '' s is P'' (subject IS predicate) sentence
form? In this thread we see this ''grammar form'' as ,uh, a
rule. Some of the members  even told me that ''Croat''- and
''Serbian language '' are not the same. Probably because
of some rule of his own. How many English languages are
only in England ? How many in Germany or Holland? I can
hear difference between Dutch dialects . What are the differences
between programmed computers and programmed people?

mijostyn: yes, the fire burns if I put my hand in it. But—as Descartes already pointed out—the sensation of "burning" is not "in" the fire but in me, the experiencer. Is fire "hot"? Well, that's the word we use in English to identify the sensation associated with fire. But do you suppose that "hotness" is a property of fire? That would be to mistake the experience of the thing with the thing itself.

Nor is the "hotness" of fire merely the excitation of electrons in its sub-atomic structure. That description merely substitutes one experience for another. It's like saying that sound is really just wave motion in the air. Schopenhauer points out that a deaf person will not grasp what sound is by viewing Chladni's traces.

"Hotness" is a subjective experience. Again, to paraphrase Descartes, if I come near the fire, I feel a pleasurable sensation of warmth; if I come too near, that pleasurable sensation turns to pain. But those sensations are not in the fire!

As for whether or not "Serbian" and "Croatian" are just different dialects of the "same" language...that's a dull topic for anyone not intimately concerned with those languages. And, of course, politics—and history—are relevant here. South Slav identity is a fraught business.