In Which Jung prewrites AtD's epigraph

[alice wellintown]

Am gonna go wit Paul M's trinity and say N, F, and M.

A tree falls in the park. Its primary qualities, those things that are
in the tree or of the tree, fall. All these primary qualities, some
have argued, can be distinguised from the secondary qualities,
qualities that are not in or of the tree but are the power to produce
an effect in a woman who sees the tree fall.

What is it that has the power tp produce this effect in the woman who
sees the tree fall? This world, not the tree or the park or even the
woman, but the world as it appears is a manifestation of the power to
produce an effect on Woman.

This power is not above, but below.

Now, this is nothing new in Western thinking. Aristotle documents the
debate and, of course, Newton' absolute and relatives, are like like
atoms and the void, and are what philosophy calls a material reality.

We are talking about N, F, and M. And these three are interested in
something called consciouness and so they look below it and find
knowledge of how we may KNOW reality.  Why are they interested in
consciousness? Because that is where we get to in the West when these
guys come along. We are, at that point, interested in Knowing and how
we know and what we can know and the limits of knowing and so on.

Now there three dudes continue to have an impact depite the fact that
we have given up on knowing and turned to an obsession with language.
We live no in adigital age or revolution, nor even in a rtechnological
one, but ina communications revolution and that revolution is being
done in English. Imagine that!