that's one of the reasons that i don't
"think"
that **** sapiens*
exists...
it seems that from *dementia
praecox's* evolution into schiozophrenia
has allowed a poetic evolution
of spreschen...
you can write subjectivity
and subjectivity,
completely devoid of polar attitudes
as to how the word is accomplished
in a sentence...
but in terms of objectivity?
you always tend to side with the people
who cite "objectivity",
i.e. third party narrators...
these this precursor stress
for a necessity
of ambiguity...
fuck's sake, like inverting a caron
into a circumflex...
^ > < ? the ****
yeah... manga
why wasn't it ever > <
_ ?
ob. human
animal sub.
if there's a subconsciousness,
surely, given the prefix-rule,
there must also be an obconsciousness...
that's ******* with my mind
right now...
but, after all, there's the categorical
foundation...
we already have puritan
objectivity... it's called physics...
dynamic (ɔ) - an "invisible" hand:
ball (p) smacks against ball (b)
and you have the dynamic (c),
i.e. ball (p) stops moving,
and ball (b) moves from
the interaction.
journalism isn't a science,
you can't be objective as such,
you don't have the safety of
a lab. slothing away at
some mundane experiment...
in journalism you only have 1 chance...
you don't get to compare
within the concept
of heidegger's dasein...
you're there, be a ******* journalist!
objectivity to me is a myth of
pompous brats who really want to
reach the apathetic potential of
a psychopath;
that's all they're doing,
imitating psychopathy;
and might i add? very poorly...
the ultimate psychopaths,
i.e. giving the most objective: oops?
the manhattan project...
so yeah...
"objectively" speaking i'm a late cousin
of harambe (the gorilla)...
but subjectively i'm equipped
with the ability to write,
something like this, rather than reduce
myself to a rainbow onomatopoeia of
syllables, imitating a human
coughing or sneezing or laughing,
rather than a gorilla intimidating
a contender for his abode and harem.
Jun 27, 2017
Jun 27, 2017 at 11:03 AM UTC
that's one of the reasons that i don't
"think"
that **** sapiens*
exists...
it seems that from *dementia
praecox's* evolution into schiozophrenia
has allowed a poetic evolution
of spreschen...
you can write subjectivity
and subjectivity,
completely devoid of polar attitudes
as to how the word is accomplished
in a sentence...
but in terms of objectivity?
you always tend to side with the people
who cite "objectivity",
i.e. third party narrators...
these this precursor stress
for a necessity
of ambiguity...
fuck's sake, like inverting a caron
into a circumflex...
^ > < ? the ****
yeah... manga
why wasn't it ever > <
_ ?
ob. human
animal sub.
if there's a subconsciousness,
surely, given the prefix-rule,
there must also be an obconsciousness...
that's ******* with my mind
right now...
but, after all, there's the categorical
foundation...
we already have puritan
objectivity... it's called physics...
dynamic (ɔ) - an "invisible" hand:
ball (p) smacks against ball (b)
and you have the dynamic (c),
i.e. ball (p) stops moving,
and ball (b) moves from
the interaction.
journalism isn't a science,
you can't be objective as such,
you don't have the safety of
a lab. slothing away at
some mundane experiment...
in journalism you only have 1 chance...
you don't get to compare
within the concept
of heidegger's dasein...
you're there, be a ******* journalist!
objectivity to me is a myth of
pompous brats who really want to
reach the apathetic potential of
a psychopath;
that's all they're doing,
imitating psychopathy;
and might i add? very poorly...
the ultimate psychopaths,
i.e. giving the most objective: oops?
the manhattan project...
so yeah...
"objectively" speaking i'm a late cousin
of harambe (the gorilla)...
but subjectively i'm equipped
with the ability to write,
something like this, rather than reduce
myself to a rainbow onomatopoeia of
syllables, imitating a human
coughing or sneezing or laughing,
rather than a gorilla intimidating
a contender for his abode and harem.