F: Now I want to ask something. Is there such a thing as ‘co-experience’ or a
‘co-state’?
K: There is no such thing as ‘co-experience’ when there is experiencing.
F: I am talking about communication. Communication implies two.
K: Up to a point.
F: And ‘co-experience’?
K: When you and I are experiencing the sunset or sex, there is no two.
F: The instruments are two.
K: Of course.
F: The perceiver is not there.
A: Are these valid questions with regard to what we have talked of just now?
K: About what?
A: No conclusion, and them moving together. Are there any valid questions in
that?
K: But we have not gone beyond the fact of coming to a conclusion. Take a little
more time over that; we are slurring over it.
F: I see that there is also the threat to the image.
K: I am committed to a certain activity and I am going to translate, in terms of
my activity, whatever you say. I say that I have understood you, but I am going
to translate what I have understood in terms of my activity. I am committed.
P: If there is a frontal attack on my image, and you ask me whether I have an
image of myself, I would say: Of course I have an image; but it is a peripheral
thing. There can be a stripping, a denudation, a breaking of the image without a
confrontation with the image. You can strip, denude the image, but do not ask me
a frontal question about the image.
K: I want to go a little deeper into this image-making.
P: Every movement of thought is adding to the image, and every negation is a
denudation of the image.