my apology for failing to respond, I simply am not comprehending.
you know, some folks have less than others, guess I arrived late, had to make do with the leftovers.
now, allow me to express the intended idea in plain language.
I was trying to say, that in order for one, to know what works,
you have to witness that person's particular form and style of human experience.
(keep in mind, we cannot develop common language for something so unique, we therefore utilize basic expression covering the outer surface only, an area, still mostly similar to one another.
for example, the two of us drink coffee together.
we both exclaim, how good it smells, how it's so steaming hot etc,
we can elaborate all night, with every word in the dictionary, still we won't express, what it's like to us in particular, to me think rethink, the person with a unique chemical, mental, emotional, physical, spiritual makeup, a unique history, education, upbringing, lifetime environment, etc.
the person with a unique form of observing, processing, and reacting and even expressing, due to the above
all we can discuss, are material properties of the experience, pasted on, with basic undefined emotional terms, and appreciate the perfect identicality in the words we are utilizing, combined with the material similarities of the identical trigger to our unique experience)
we can only witness our own inner meaningful experience, and make due with a mere illusion, that we share our experiences with others even to an inner more critical degree.)
now, if the words I used (or abused) did not do the trick,
I would appreciate very much, to be corrected.
by the way, allow me to ask you what your definition of self is.
I thought it mostly represents who, how, and what, we are long term,
also somewhat, who, how, and what we can potentially become,
and just a small bit, who, how, and what we ounce were.