Posted: Mar 27, 2012 12:33 am
by LucidFlight
Maybe one thinks one is thinking about non-self-evident things when in actual fact they are thinking about an abstract representation of the non-self-evident thing — which in itself may be non-self-evident other than the fact that you're thinking about them and, as such, they are self-evident at the time, but only as an abstract and self-evident representation of the non-self-evident thing you thought you were thinking about, in which case, it's not entirely self-evident that one is thinking self-evidentially about something possibly completely removed, evidentially-speaking, from the non-self-evident thing in itself about which one initially though they were evidently thinking about.