[panta rhei]

RingingSword : "This question, which addresses the relationship between the medium and the terms it transmits, calls for an intricate and challenging answer. I can begin to respond by saying this: each discernible entity is an intersection of here and everywhere; each discernible entity is a roadmap to all other entities. [These responses point toward non-local, topological boundary negotiations.]"

pan : Well then, let's negotiate. First, since I'm not sure what you mean by "non-local", I humbly request your definition. My understanding of the term is limited to the blurb I read in Michael Talbot's The Holographic Universe.
*counting down to the first assertion that all distinctions (such as "map" and "journey") are merely illusions*

RingingSword : "...When our traversal across the terrain of a defined field of action brings us to a rational awareness of the impossible, we have come smack against the outer boundary of said field. Our options include redefining the field on a more inclusive basis, discovering the specifications of an encompassing field within which the bounded field is enclosed, or accepting our imaginative confinement to the bounded field, and thus accepting the permanence of the impossibility it defines."

pan : I don't see an impossibility as a matter of "acceptance" or non. When we arrive at the rational awareness of the impossible, our only option is to work with'n'round the limitations it imposes.
To discover that it was possible after all, would only illuminate the fact that it was never impossible in the first place.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
(pan) “… what is transcended in the discovery of the previously unknown? Knowledge itself!?”

RingingSword : "Well said. The general statement of this issue takes this form: The specifiable locality of each discernible entity is unstable and incomplete."

pan : Granting the general statement, I fail to see its correlation to the issue in question. How does the instability or incompleteness of an individual's position in time'n'place (or pov) correspond to the transcendence of knowledge via the acquisition of more knowledge?
For that matter, how is term "transcendence" even indicative of that process?
Oh, and let's not forget, it was the transcendence of impossibilities you spoke of in the earlier post. How does this tie into discovering the unknown?

RingingSword : "...even in the instance of a complete (this is not actually achievable as per above) and rational determination of impossibility, said determination deconstructs itself in simultaneity with its declaration. Each determination of impossibility marks a new extension of an infinitely extendable boundary."

pan : Well, let's have a look at the self-deconstruction of my definition. If you'd be so kind as to demonstrate it, I define an "impossibility" (quite simply) as that which is not possible. --Have at it.

RingingSword : "Each determination of impossibility marks a new extension of an infinitely extendable boundary."

pan : Again, I'll ask you to show me this. Using my definition, wherein do we see the demarcation between the old and new boundaries?
Also, please demonstrate, if you will, the inherent infinite progression of my definition.

RingingSword : "If my characterization of the universe as “open” is false, then a refutation of the following axiom should be demonstrable: The specifiable locality of every discernible entity is unstable and incomplete.

pan : Here again, granting the validity of your axiom, and seeing no reason to refute it, I fail to see its correlation to the issue in question (in this case, the "opened" nature of the universe).

RingingSword : "I hasten to present the following scenario to every conscious being: your vitality lies within the embrace of the divinity of freedom. Would you risk the loss of your divinity of freedom through its denial?"

pan : I'm not quite sure how to take this. Honestly, it smacks of tradional religious fear mongering. I'm sure you didn't intend it that way, but what did you have in mind?
Are we to grant (without question) this notion of "the divinity of freedom" because in its denial our "vitality" may hang in the balance? HA!
I sincerely hope that's not what you meant.