another way to practice philosophy according to aristotelian conceptualisation is to not presuppose awe, it's more like this, write something down really quickly, an imitation of lightning, and then become struck by awe, rather than being in awe prior and doing the dusty practice of... taking your time... bewilder yourself to ask the dumbest question, answer so wisely that no one will take it as good advice but simply as a maxim no one bothers to encourage in undertaking... i too wish i could have that 'cool' disregard for philosophy, but after studying chemistry, philosophy is not a ponce word, but the word to unlearn hard science and learn a humanism, i too wish i could brush aside the word or practice, but unlike bukowski, i'm not really into gambling on horses.

as currently developed and largely ignored in terms
of the critique of notation i could encapsulate the word
doppelgänger* as the existentialists
would "doppelgänger", the sad sod in me
does actually think about it,
it would refer to either an ambiguity
of a misnomer,
i took the simpler route and just referred
to a misnomer rather than an ambiguity,
singled out words are not really ambiguous
if you burn the dictionary and forget it
ever existed,
i know doppelgänger is ~doppelgänger,
a quasi-misnomer when referring to a
particular instant, i.e.:
find me a clown with a similar background
to the joker - a drunken father who gave him
a Chelsea grin with a knife in a drunken rage...
but what about the joker who studied chemistry
and fell into a pit of chemicals that bleached
his face permanent white?
as socrates remained in motto of:
reconcile particulars with universals...
me? i'm wondering: reconcile particulars
with particulars and universals with universals...
the latter is easy, one pops up, another, three more,
and they are the cogs in the machinery of two
eyes and only 1 point of concentration:
an optical isolation of a tree, a forest, a constellation,
etc., universals are harmonies,
makes no difference to biology of the universal
23 pairs of chromosomes, or the mathematical π,
is the genome sequence the length of π?
anyway, i could have used the existential notation
of encapsulating the word with " ",
but i preferred the post-existentialism notation
of ~, just to avoid the misnomer qualification of
word usage, but leaving enough space for not
undertaken constantly-questioning ambiguity,
i know i can slide a cube through a square hole...
and i know that an actual doppelgänger of a clown
does not exist... find me the particular of particulars,
finding a universal of universals is easy,
you can just quote me on the 23 chromosome pairs
and π - the universal of universals is 1,
the particular of particulars is necessarily ∞,
non-explanatory orientation, just deviant use of a symbol /
encoding...
i know that the doppelgänger of the joker
acted is an ~doppelgänger, but is not a "doppelgänger",
because the word doppelgänger is not necessarily
a misnomer, i know there are no two identical clowns,
but then there are two universals
clown here                                                    clown there
                                            p
                                            a
                                            r
                                            t
                                            i
                                            c
                                            u
                                            l
                                            a
                                            r
                                            s
clown there                                                        clown here,
and indeed universals are governed by multiplication,
and indeed particulars are governed by addition,
i.e. you add to your individuality to be different,
dress different, speak different, speak different,
but then the universals come along and you're a factor
of multiplication, and essentially an analogue,
a deviating analogue, but then you congregate
and become the punk scene, e.g.
but as socrates said, 'i'd only be interested in someone
solving the problem, but not actually solving it.'
and like in all good mathematics, division and subtraction
are just remainders of an indivisible number,
they are indeed methods, scare tactics,
the former segregation and the latter death...
but after all, we're all human and stomp on this earth
with a unified purpose of having weetabix in the morning.