Strange and Wonderful

It was human-centered, right? But then the problem arose: people were infinitely diverse. As long as you hit upon someone's thoughts, that was enough; 2:00, that was enough. Although the sword of the gods could also strike, after all, its numbers were few, right? It was easier to unify. Athena said, "This is a chair"—wasn't that enough? Athena was the measure of all things; that was easy. I just had to follow her. The goddess of wisdom was enough, right? But if every person here were the measure of every existing thing's existence and every nonexistent thing's nonexistence, wouldn't the world fall into chaos? The first problem we could not solve was the problem of concepts. What did you mean by a table? What was a chair? What was this, what was that, what was a camera? What was an elite school? What was the college entrance examination? To hell with the college entrance examination—by my standard, I believed it did not exist. Didn't that bring out the feeling of Wang Yangming that we discussed before? Right? I believed you existed, so you existed. I was the measure of all things, right? That flower bloomed in the wilderness. I had never heard of a country called India. You could absolutely say that. But although such subjectivity, with its emphasis on humanism and people as the center, was a great step forward, you would find its problem: it was the individual, and it was never you. But what did I emphasize? Reason. What did I emphasize? What was a feeling called? Whose feeling was it? Everyone spoke of their own feelings. Was that different from reasoning something out? What I felt was more often personal, subjective; but how did reasoning have to proceed? You would find that the Sophist School's claim