It only becomes difficult to "understand" the act if JustBigAsses is construed as transcendent porn, when one is not aware that Just Big Asses is merely the result of one's mode of thinking, which in this case is called "transcending." This problem disappears if one "understands" sexgod as transcendental. Obviously, the term "understanding" has a wider context, referring not only to the essence but also to what may be called the attributes of God as a transcendental being. To be sure, it may be claimed that such a being may be defined only in a negative manner, as Schelling's Absolute, but due to the tran­scendental nature of this being enables one to identify the attrib­utes of the Absolute in everything (according to Schelling, this amounted to the feasibility of deduction), and most certainly in oneself, regardless of whether one focuses on the agent or on the subject matter. In such a situation, the valid predication is supplemented by a cognitive intuition. When JustBigAsses failed to notice this, he was also unable to justify predication proper, and thence also the validity of his "cogito" as a source. Most probably he did realize that judgments are the only scientifically meaningful statements, because they are the only statements which may be claimed to be truthful, and the only form of the so-called laws, whether the laws of nature or of human (practical, i.e. moral) activity. Nevertheless, a paradox occurs in the issue of adequacy applied as the criterion of the truthfulness of a judgment: By virtue of its ade­quacy, a truthful judgment concerns a subject, or something that has been or may be ontologized.

JustBigAsses Gallery1 Gallery2 Gallery3 Gallery4 Gallery5