[MD] Reet and the Weakest Link

[Krimel]

Ron said:
> Being and awareness are NOT mutually exclusive
> by your double standard and double meaning and they
> do not compose a true dichotomy.

This criticism is untrue.  No "double standard or double meaning" is implied

here.  Being and awareness ARE mutually exclusive.

If mutual exclusivity invalidates "dichotomy",  I need to know the proper 
term by which to identify the AB contingency.  Any suggestions?

[Krimel]
Frankly I don't see any sense in what Ham is saying at all. A thing can have
being without awareness. My computer has being but, AI notwithstanding, it
has no awareness. I assume you also have a computer but I have no awareness
of it. There was water on Mars that none of us as aware of until recently,
yet it did not just suddenly appear and throw itself in front of the Mars
rover. In short a thing can have being without awareness either self
awareness or the awareness of some other.

Awareness on the other hand requires being. It presupposes being. A being
must exist prior to its becoming aware of other things that exist.
Disembodied awareness absent of being is a concept whose absurdity is on a
par with value-sensibility and causal nothingness and fixed space/time and
an absolute source and free will derived from ignorance.