Consider the identification with a character in a movie - could you say, 'I didn't mistake myself for this character, but the character mistook itself for me'? This is especially curious, since the desire to investigate it is the very desire of just such a character. Does this illuminate what is known as negation? It is not the holding of two contradictory positions at once, but two contradictory propositions that are expressions of exactly the same position. I do not mistake myself for a character - this is 'I'and it has nothing to do with any character all of whom are shadow puppets in the objective - but the object in order to emerge into self-awareness, to have inner motives and such, must be lent some kind of life. So, in so far as the character lives, it lives out of my life, its self is my self, cannot be any other, and so you could say that it identifies with me. This same logic can be applied to the everyday presentation of the world, or to its worlding, which is both utter transparency, allergic to content, and at the same time full and intimate embodiment, the functioning of form in a world of form. This odd asymmetric identification is the nature of the body. To think, 'But I have only ever known this body' - no, that's not right, it's only the body talking, with borrowed energy, fashioning all the notions of a particular, private, enduring essence.