Sarcher's essay demonstrates that speaking of this plainly in a philosophical treatise is not the best way to do it. The minute you try to lay it out in this, in this quasi analytical philosophy sort of way, it seems to use something right? It becomes too schematic. I mean, it becomes theorized in a way that, i mean, we're coming at this from our own tradition, but maybe not the best ways to portray something which is so fundamentally tied to the subjective. Slike, it, it's like just going walking into the wrong room, isn't te yes?