"parmenides" poems
To separate the word from it's identity
Is quite the delightful mind game
How things are agreed to be described or named
is just convention for communication; a key,
for organization of knowledge. Nothing more, less, and neither.
While unable to negate this absurdity, ultimately, why bother?
For example, the universe, or reality for that matter, is not "good" or "bad." It just "is" and, thus, not even that (by "that" I am referring to the aforementioned "is" of course, but also the formal definition of "that," however, I also ironically don't mean that either by "that" as I mean nothing, yet I also don't mean "nothing" by "that" as I intend "nothing," "is," and "that" to be both metaphorically and literally interpreted while also neither simultaneously, which is seemingly contradictory). Did you follow that? I apologize, but it's a paradox to try and explain this concept/whatever about words with more words, thus I can only hope to allude to it or otherwise imply it. Lend me your ear again, or your eyes I suppose, but also neither... Sorry! One more time:
A palindrome isn't even a palindrome by it's own literal definition, but it's literal definition is also that of a palindrome. The word "palindrome" exists both as a palindrome and not a palindrome and also neither simultaneously. Schrodinger's cat, but no, too, and also both and Gorgias, Parmenides, Zeno an
May 29, 2018
May 29, 2018 at 4:43 PM UTC
America, you don’t need us anymore
so we’re going on vacation.
You’ve got religion to whisper in your ear
and sing you to sleep at night,
and culture of homogeneity to get you up
and going on cold Monday mornings, coffee in hand.
You’ve got plastic prophesies to keep you alive
and sick on medicines from unrhyming
peddlers of purpose.
You’ve got assumptions and science to teach the kids now
so long as the chemists abandon their really significant digits!
You’ve got calculus problems and practical things to scribble
on the back of the wornout canvasses of Monet and the recycled
papyrus of Parmenides—nothing’s changed.
You don’t need metaphorical ice cream.
You don’t need symbolism of green ideas.
You don’t need moonlight anymore.
You don’t need breezes on summer afternoons
unless they’re part of a lemonade ad.
You don’t need stars.
You don’t need hope or purpose or prosperity
that can come from the meaningless lines
of poems.
You don’t need us anymore, so we’re leaving.
That’s it.
We’re done.
Goodbye, America. It’s been
fun.
Jan 16, 2014
Jan 16, 2014 at 8:58 PM UTC
Time is something that wonders by,
meaning nothing, but for our lives.
The great expanse,
the truth untold
It’s all eqations, so I’m told.
Time is someting I’d like to conquer,
in my body and mind,
I’d like to know what Einstein saw after Newton,
In Time.
I’d like to beat the fates at their game,
reveal Plato’s world of ever lasting.
Time came, it went and it’s coming,
it’s now and then and will be – but not forever, at least here.
it conquers death, and life.
Time after all is not concerned.
So time,
in mystery and rarefied symbolism,
Are you real or just conjured?
Parmenides had you for nought,
Explain the passing moment from now till then,
The change from what is to what isn’t makes the sense your illusion,
maybe you’re static and we’re just pasing,
percptions’ lie and conscious deception.
But, if you really do have dimension,
let it be revealed,
let me turn your hand to my creation,
and make what I haven’t from past sensation.
Sep 17, 2009
Sep 17, 2009 at 1:38 AM UTC
it's not really a shortcut to philosophy when writing
it in a shape of a poem, hardly a reason to trust
there's an orthodox choice of subjects -
unresolved problem, or even having to warrant
that horrid academic style of narration - and even if
not academic then simply in the vein of vanity: 'he's
wrong, he's wrong, oh he's definitely wrong...'
after all poetry can be philosophical,
after all heraclitus wrote sparingly and wore a cloak
of enigmas - as joseph and the multicoloured dreamcoat,
so too heraclitus and the multinigmatic (πολυνιγματικoς)
cloak; then there was parmenides of elea &
empedocles of arcagas who just wrote poetry,
albeit much less self-involving
as modernity would like to believe - and i guess
if qualified as didactic poetry, the instructions were certain
disguised as faults of their own understanding,
thus the instructions are of a higher calibre, in that
they are wrong and the reader must service their
wrongs... say... with something like galileo or newton,
because who the hell would like to constantly read
didactic poetry of specific instruction to be fulfilled
while the poet has to only write it in the comfy abode
of the page?
Dec 20, 2015
Dec 20, 2015 at 7:34 AM UTC