I think you took this as a "too personal" attack. I didn't come into the thread to "shut you down", but to engage in an intelligent conversation/debate, which is more or less rare around these parts.
I still don't agree with you that your first couplet is an aphorism. I misread what you said about the second couplet being an aphorism but the critique I had for the second couplet applies to the first one. I think that it is an observation of self, which cannot be called an aphorism -- well, well wait a second... let me clarify it like so; should it be an aphorism -- it is more so esoteric, personal observation - than it is a general truth that can be recognized by the person analyzing it (a reader, or listener) -- and I provided two examples of what a true aphorism looks like. But that is all semantics and subjective when it comes down to it, it's personal opinion so - there goes that effort.
By the way I am familiar with some of Francis Bacon's work -- and he might do the "exact same thing" even though that statement is broad as all hell, and completely worthless (no offense) in a debate. If you'd care to go into details and examples of Francis Bacon doing the "exact same thing" I'd love to see them, provided the context is also noted. I'd hate to think you were just name dropping for "credibility's sake".
I think then you get a little existentialist for your own good with the whole, reality is not truly truth at all. You get caught up in your own words and contradict what you intend with your piece and what you respond to me with. I have a low tolerance for existentialism personally -- studying it was absolutely droll and mind numbing (or WAS it?) You called "truth is whatever our reality reveals to us" a fact -- now, is that really a fact? Because what does fact imply? Fact is an undeniable truth, is it not? Now judging by your own "philosophical" musings on the same subject, can you really make that statement? Is truth a lie? How can you make that statement anyway? In order for a lie to exist there HAS to be truth. So wouldn't you think it impossible for lies to exist without truth existing as well?
There is just so much MISSING from this 4 line "riddle". I just don't think it encompasses all of what you want it to encompass. I think it is a poor piece because of that, not your fault really... but that's a lot to take responsibility for in 4 lines.... I think you were a bit overzealous... bit off more than you could chew.
But to your credit, it did require you to think. (OR DID IT) F'ing existentialist garbage =P
__________________
|