There you have it. What do you think? Okay, I'll define exist: I mean, if you or I weren't here to dream it up, would it still be (be what? how about: "a conceptual object"? would the wise man say it wouldn't matter if it existed because it has no meaning if you or I aren't here to dream it up (is that evasive?)?

Is it a discovery or a creation? Is is a creation that approximates a truth that will later be revealed? Could have built a microwave a gazillion years ago if you'd had the knowledge. Is knowledge discovered or created? Again, is it an approximation of things to later be revealed?

I think it's the latter in both the case of 'abstract' and 'knowledge', with the limitation that the approximation can only get better, never reaching unity (if it did consciousness would have to be redefined). Therefore, the truth cannot be known (via intellect (meaning not through emotion)) and when it is, the game starts over - no further need for definitions right?

Please define "the abstract".

By virtue of the common definition of the word, no, "abstract" does not exist without us. In fact, that is the definition of the word. "Apart from concrete existence".

Indeed. Sorry, I knew I was leaving something out. Okay, I agree 100% about the definition, however I ponder... I have to go for now, be gone for a couple of days. I'll have to try again later.

how about something along these lines: The concept of logic. I might hold that ithe concept of logic is representative of an inherent property of the "space (degrees of freedom)" in which thought exists. Gotta go for now.