On ''what there is''


The question looks ''philosophical'' in the sense of ''what exist?''. In the old terminology ''ontology question''.
The modern formulation (by Quine) is: ''what are the values of your variables''? In our hobby ''what are
the new available components''?  Can one person know what are available components? Obviously not
but we have ''collective knowledge''. Each contribution is welcome. Like in science. But like in science there
are individuals with special contributions. Raul with his MM contributions and his ''successor'' chakster
with his contributions about ''both kinds'': MC's and MM's. Despite his ''modest means''. I think we should
be thankful to have such individuals.
128x128nandric
You mentioned Alan Watts and have obviously no idea
why. Alan was ''expert'' in ''all kinds of religions''. 
BTW ''anything'' like ''everything'' or ''all'' are universal
quantifiers which are used to formulate generality. But
those are not ''names'' with referring function. So what
do you mean with ''anything''? Is that the ''ópposite'' of
''something''? Both make no sense in isolation. 
Only thing obvious to me is you didn’t click the link. If you had you would see the title of the video is, "What There Is" and the first thing Alan Watts says is, "I’m going to talk about what there is." Which coincidentally is the title of your discussion, On "what there is".

Oh well. So much for, "Each contribution is welcome."
If this is your contribution on ''what cartridges there are?'' 
then we don't need  your  reference to Alan Watts. 
I am not interested in religious questions and made that
clear. Mr. Watts has no idea what he is talking about. 
Anyone can check this on internet. Provided one is familiar 
with ''existence issue'' .