Nov 2017
this would be considered a "world salad", by people who's ambitions are to write books, but who barely lack the ambition to read a newspaper thoroughly, let alone a novel... or like those a.a. gill dyslexics, who "write", well, write by talking, having slaves to write for them... if these ***** are "writers", then i'm a ******* "orator"!
i've mentioned this faux pas once:
to read a hardback copy of a book
with the sleeve on, is a rare faux pas.
you only read hardback books
with the sleeve off,
because there are actually two
the ends* when reading a hardback
edition...
(a) the end of actually finish to read
a book, and
(b) putting the sleeve back on...
any bibliophiles erotica manages to
invoke this "minor" detail.
brooding, brooding,
asking for a balancing act: ah!
it's not the essence of thought to
think about thinking,
babushka dolls and all...
the cognitive equivalent of
the taj mahal before me...
tibet is the vatican of the orient...
the displaced eskimo and the white
buffer reef of the northerners...
to think is not to un-think
thinking & "meditate"...
within the realm of void-creation
nature answers: vacuum does not
belong to nature,
all holes must be filled,
from each unto each other:
an extract of worth, however small,
however big... from each
an extract of worth.
act!
ah! that's it!
there's the "correct" cogito ante actum,
as there's the "incorrect"
definition of those, who have been
morally satisfied...
the cogito circa cogitans -
the former school:
though before an action,
but that is as abstract as nothing
compared to the second tier,
only with a fathomable morality can
there be a cogitans = narratio parallel,
semblance, equilibrium -
not before this point can you have
the leisure of making thought
narration...
to think about the existence of
thought is more profound than
the cognitive escapism of an existence of god...
sorry, but that's how the cookie crumbles..
to de-fetish the existence of thought
to be below god, is:
(a) an excuse for argue the existence of
a god, and (b)
that's an open suggestion.
but you can't exactly enjoy thought
as narration when you overcome the ought-process
of having established an ethical model
for not thinking about ethical conundrums...
cogito is a unit that replaces the
psychological unit basin / basis of ego -
there is no ego to be spoken of,
only **** sigma - which is identified by
thinking...
in the rationality of identifying
with thinking, the ego has no
storage fathomability to store memorable
scenarios...
if thought it order,
then ego is chaos...
there is no ego totality -
but sure as **** there's a totality of thought...
ego: incisor point in
psychiatric anatomy.
to think about the existence of thought
is to move beyond an "ought" dimension of
thought, the θ question -
is debating the existence of
a god, moral, or immoral,
since...
well... since, inquiring beyond
self-knowledge, i.e. acknowledging
a second tier of consciousness, i.e.:
thinking about thought...
cogitans circa cogitatio
is the foundation into theological
inquiry, from this basis: furthered;
why?
the circa contra the ergo...
when did thinking,
verb / non-verb process ever extend into
a ghost limb?
when did thinking ever arrive at realising
a posit of "self" or "consciousness"?
never in my reading has thought
managed to extract it's own identity without
an indicative unit of ego...
thought always paralleled the body,
it never imploded into a per se of a "self"...
to which it furthered itself to consume
by exhumation.
there was never a
thought conscious of thinking -
since the preoccupation of this
investigation was always shrouded,
if not merely preoccupied by a theory of, ego...
of agency...
or else, a self-cannibalising
entity of good, fed by man's belief
to satiate a vengeful hope to be mastered
into a genuflection.
i, oddly enough,
establish my existence from the standpoint of
cogito circa cogitans -
think about thinking -
since i no longer desire thought
to mark me as a student of ethics...
i've obliterated the θ-debate by making myself
parallel: in a shady guise of solipsistic interaction...
since i have arrived at this point,
i have no freudian three tier theory,
of affix subs- or obs-,
to parallel their straitjacket unit
of incompetence...
nor a super- to a sub- or an un-...
i am, the Minotaur,
and thought, is my labyrinth.
i've mentioned this faux pas once:
to read a hardback copy of a book
with the sleeve on, is a rare faux pas.
you only read hardback books
with the sleeve off,
because there are actually two
the ends* when reading a hardback
edition...
(a) the end of actually finish to read
a book, and
(b) putting the sleeve back on...
any bibliophiles erotica manages to
invoke this "minor" detail.
brooding, brooding,
asking for a balancing act: ah!
it's not the essence of thought to
think about thinking,
babushka dolls and all...
the cognitive equivalent of
the taj mahal before me...
tibet is the vatican of the orient...
the displaced eskimo and the white
buffer reef of the northerners...
to think is not to un-think
thinking & "meditate"...
within the realm of void-creation
nature answers: vacuum does not
belong to nature,
all holes must be filled,
from each unto each other:
an extract of worth, however small,
however big... from each
an extract of worth.
act!
ah! that's it!
there's the "correct" cogito ante actum,
as there's the "incorrect"
definition of those, who have been
morally satisfied...
the cogito circa cogitans -
the former school:
though before an action,
but that is as abstract as nothing
compared to the second tier,
only with a fathomable morality can
there be a cogitans = narratio parallel,
semblance, equilibrium -
not before this point can you have
the leisure of making thought
narration...
to think about the existence of
thought is more profound than
the cognitive escapism of an existence of god...
sorry, but that's how the cookie crumbles..
to de-fetish the existence of thought
to be below god, is:
(a) an excuse for argue the existence of
a god, and (b)
that's an open suggestion.
but you can't exactly enjoy thought
as narration when you overcome the ought-process
of having established an ethical model
for not thinking about ethical conundrums...
cogito is a unit that replaces the
psychological unit basin / basis of ego -
there is no ego to be spoken of,
only **** sigma - which is identified by
thinking...
in the rationality of identifying
with thinking, the ego has no
storage fathomability to store memorable
scenarios...
if thought it order,
then ego is chaos...
there is no ego totality -
but sure as **** there's a totality of thought...
ego: incisor point in
psychiatric anatomy.
to think about the existence of thought
is to move beyond an "ought" dimension of
thought, the θ question -
is debating the existence of
a god, moral, or immoral,
since...
well... since, inquiring beyond
self-knowledge, i.e. acknowledging
a second tier of consciousness, i.e.:
thinking about thought...
cogitans circa cogitatio
is the foundation into theological
inquiry, from this basis: furthered;
why?
the circa contra the ergo...
when did thinking,
verb / non-verb process ever extend into
a ghost limb?
when did thinking ever arrive at realising
a posit of "self" or "consciousness"?
never in my reading has thought
managed to extract it's own identity without
an indicative unit of ego...
thought always paralleled the body,
it never imploded into a per se of a "self"...
to which it furthered itself to consume
by exhumation.
there was never a
thought conscious of thinking -
since the preoccupation of this
investigation was always shrouded,
if not merely preoccupied by a theory of, ego...
of agency...
or else, a self-cannibalising
entity of good, fed by man's belief
to satiate a vengeful hope to be mastered
into a genuflection.
i, oddly enough,
establish my existence from the standpoint of
cogito circa cogitans -
think about thinking -
since i no longer desire thought
to mark me as a student of ethics...
i've obliterated the θ-debate by making myself
parallel: in a shady guise of solipsistic interaction...
since i have arrived at this point,
i have no freudian three tier theory,
of affix subs- or obs-,
to parallel their straitjacket unit
of incompetence...
nor a super- to a sub- or an un-...
i am, the Minotaur,
and thought, is my labyrinth.
