.as i reiterated the stream-of-consciousness cut-off point: wow! that's a great way of thinking about "it".

and "it" is a great starting point,
i never understood how
the French existentialists,
or existentialists in general,
notably the rigid Germans
could invert the comma on
such a pivotal word like ego...
maybe this whole "gender neutrality"
of pronouns stems from
what the French existentialists
cited, i.e. "i"...
but then...
   aren't we talking about
a number neutrality?
     they isn't one, as one would
claim, in Royal speak, no?

i still prefer to don female sunglasses,
i prefer the feline contorts...

there was something else...
ah... **** me, i almost forgot,
a reworking of
cogito ergo sum...

   right...

            cogitans qua esse

i.e.

it's more of a question,
a prompt rather than a proposition,
i.e. an observation,
it's a prompt, a vector,
because there are no fixed
coordinates,
hence?
it's self-explanatory:
        exploration is on the table...

mind you:
i know of gay males who
love divas...
  lady gaga, kesha, rihanna, etc.,

i can't control the music i like,
music is unconscious
with regards to liking or disliking
it...
     headphones and the analogy
within the confines of the sound
of progress?
   really?! the sound of cars is
motivational, enough to not escape
into music?
   don't **** on me with
that kind of *******...

and in relation to dreams,
   i love this quote from rogue one
(non verbatim):

are you the sort of man that carries
his prison wherever he goes?
that's how i count for the phenomenon
of dreams...
      i rarely dream...
i sleep...
   but dreams are shackles
under the scalpel-scrutiny of
Freud's observation...
   lazy, bourgeoisie demands for
scrutiny and, fixations on
metaphysical affairs...

   sure... dreams originate in the brain...
hyper-inflated memory...
dreams are a distorted,
hyper-inflated memory...
i'm pretty sure that people
with a photographic memory
dream very little...
        the cheapest,
   gateway hallucinogenic...

i don't like dreams,
reality is too real to concern myself
with dreaming,
but i have no say in that,
my body prevents me from
elaborate labyrinths in
the land of Nod & Nox...
which, oddly enough...
is mildly refreshing.

- but back to the Cartesian revision...
plain and simple

cogitans qua esse -

    thinking as being, being...
in question:
how much of your thinking
translates itself into
your, being?
day dream, O Joe?
conjure fantasies?
   hence the question,
because the fact per se is no
longer enough...
people are wondering...

the old i think therefore i exist
isn't enough...
given...
how much of your thinking
actually exists, in being
what your thinking surmounts
to the prompt of thought
in its genesis -

what can motivate you to think
if not the originality of
your being,
however subtly construed
in deviance,
yet hinging onto a figment
of a "norm"?

because, well... **** me! cogito ergo sum
is a eureka moment!
it's not a preposition,
it's a proposition, hence a vector,
with coordinates,
and it can be changed,
since it's proposed,
                 and not supposed...
otherwise it wouldn't be
so ****** revolutionary!

hence my counter, it's a question...
cogitans qua esse...
thinking as being, being?
yes, we're all Nazis having read
the defector Heidegger's obscure works...
pure and proud Aryans...
gorilla punches on the chest
and all...

   it's a simple question,
   and i'm done with undermining
ontology with
                          ******* out maxims
akin to Nietzsche or la Rochefoucauld,
or Machiavelli.