The Question of What Can and Cannot Be Spoken, and What Can and Cannot Be Publicly Exposed

In all the novels of the course, the question is not raised and can not be publicly disclosed nor published, and it is related to the problem of larger class and resistance. Discuss. Language is basically not only talked but also personal thought that is thought. Thoughts may be destroyed by languages, "Language is also eroded by thinking" (Orwell). In a hegemonic society bound by a class, this means that some of us can protect ourselves, and we will try to manage personal stories and agendas that we can not do.

Ask myself: Who can trust even those who can do, read, look, listen, do not speak, people who can think, even people who can not think? If you are honest about this subject, the well thought out answer is that you are someone other than yourself, you essentially do not mind if you can let others make your thoughts to others It is said that it is. And if you think you can decide for yourself, and some others can not be or can not be tolerated, that is even worse. As Christopher Hitchens said, when you destroy the rights of others, you will also put a lightning rod yourself.

You thought you could name the facts in other ways, but you can not. You can not name it. You can not name facts properly. The only thing you can do is argue, denying it, hoping it, hoping for it, or casting doubt on it, but all of this includes the whole proposition. You can not turn that proposition into a real or incorrect one on a logical subject matter. It can only be used as an assertion or refusal, or similar, but it can not be named.

Is this finding suspected? If it is possible, it can not be regarded as a basic proposition. It can not be directly suspected, but it may be suspected indirectly. There, it is responsible for creating a reasonable ability to discover the ability of the heart of a person who presupposes the existence of a person. It is not until the next meditation that this problem will be solved. Before this meditation was over, the common sense of physical existence was also raised. As a result of the analysis, the physical existence is based on that person's perception (such as seeing and touching it), when a person claims that perception is that person's mental behavior, claims on physical existence Let's assume that there is a sense of inductance. Therefore, the concept of my thought existence is not premised on the existence of any body, but the claim of physical existence is based on the perception of one person, which indicates the existence of the mind.