A repugnant smell, and the question is asked, metaphysical in nature, can I assume, subsumed in paranoia, a comparable experience shared - or can there be a shared ‘experience’ following the logic of the separation - the initial division, that philosophical divide plaguing all initiated minds - where the observer realizes that this presumption has long gone unquestioned - what grounds then does one have to hold the self/other distinction, there is an experience, that much seems certain, but how much further can we venture, yet perhaps the divide is real, the solipsist’s challenge met metaphysically, but how is a similar epistemic challenge met - and even if we accept that one becomes two, which seems to be the first hurdle of even ‘pure’ a priori knowledge; I.e., mathematics, how then, both metaphysically or even epistemically, do we move - ‘we’ ha, here language assumes, beyond a position of simultaneous degrees of incomprehensible occurrences of events?
When deeply embedded in dialogue my position remains, a logical conclusion is drawn, given a finite set of details and a range of finite interpretative challenges, some reaction, projection, a bit of ‘reality’, assumed probabilities applied to possible metaphysical assumptions presumably assigned at random, you look a stranger, friend, or lover in the eye, words are exchanged and somewhere an assessment occurs.
Is that a sentence?
The air is too stagnant.
A repugnant smell emerges.