Glyph of two

This material comes after another one that also speaks about shadows. Is it ok? Maybe,or maybe not. Maybe,this time I wanted to be more Plato than  Descartes. Maybe this time,I wanted to believe more that,everything we perceive in this world are nothing more than mere shadows. Maybe I wanted to believe more in that dualism of immaterial mind and the material body. 

Trying to understand everything,I allowed my mind to unsubscribed to the argument that, changeless, eternal substantial form is necessarily immaterial. 

However I understand things I rather allowed my mind to perceive the Material as an unchanging Immaterial. Confusing theories,is it? May so,that philosophy of mind often goes beyond the meaning which, I believe(at a first sight) would be. But,no matter how much I want to see the mind and the body separated by their nature but by what they create at a time too, I fail to separate Material from the Immaterial. Perception is a product of the organic after all… as the mind can not exist without a material suport or, as the body as a whole universe can not exist without mind. 

As Plato makes it clear… huh,the Forms are ideal universals, by which we are able to understand the world; theses, arguments, theories,symbolisms that have proved (or not) their validity over time. And, everything sits under the glyph of two after all. 

Is it?