well, isn't english odd...
               at aphorism 53 (ponderings V)
comes a "grand" joke -
imagine laughing out-loud
when reading a philosophy book...

by-the-way?
   heidegger's being & time
makes much more sense
given these kind gestures
   of what could be best described
as the subconscious tier
to the conscious tier
         of the magnum opus...

but isn't english odd?
    one word, well several:

machinery -
       machinastions - ney!
sheen - shimmery -
  chat - chopping -
                          machinery -

of all the languages worth
studying - the english have
a "schizophrenic" attitude
towards their own spreschen -
  
  the eyes write one thing -
  the tongue speaks another thing -

ultimately i'm engrossing myself
in depoliticizing
this psychiatric term,
and instead:
         to poeticize schizophrenia...

otherwise it remains in hands
of idiots, rather than artists,
  and it seems, forever the ******* child
of ancient myths, with hercules
and atlas included.

má-sheen       vs. machine
         (acute a's worth of the otherwise
  hidden arm of the tetragrammaton, H) -

anyway...
   yes, yes, i have read the god delusion
by richie dorky -
                       for some reason i don't
understand why he cites kant
   as being an atheist...
            oddly enough, if you have
2 years to spare, and read
    the critique of pure reason
   (i think 2 years is long enough to
understand that book,
   and read it in a 2 volume edition) -

   at the end he cites himself as
a theist!        obviously he gives
the 3 improbable arguments for a proof
of         the noumenon (god)
                 i.e. res per se (thing in itself),
so i don't know what richie dorky winks
thinks he did pulling a fast one
like that...
         i just call it prussian stubborness
on the part of kant.