Now that’s some bullshit.
I think first we start with Kant in establishing “power.” Power is a function. We relate function with results but results are not the end-all-be-all. Results are structured by action. Action is defined by results.
Theoretically, we can approach the existential functions that result in our Reality but practically, we cannot know the difference between our approach towards understanding and understanding itself.
So there is a direct and necessary correlation when we talk about functions in math, biology, physics and the functions that govern the universe (and govern our correlation of correlation).
For example, there is…
Hundred thousandaires in the coupe to set the stage for
Scene set, play your role and bet your scene stretch
Studies have shown (I think; there’s like a 55% chance this shit is kinda accurate, like a 40% chance that it’s true) that humans that are able to communicate in social situations have an inclination to adopt the social groups vocabulary and accent. That’s it. The rest is 100% bullshit.
One significant point from this is that humans as individuals do not want to have this inclination. The inclination is organically expressed alongside our awareness of it. Our reaction…
Starting in reverse, we start with the conclusion that our conclusion is the beginning of an understanding.
An understanding that has happened and the only “evidence” is a conclusion we start with. To change conclusions is to change an understanding.
How many kinds of understandings are there? The question has many answers but the debate is between one and two.
An understanding is of one kind — deterministic state of affairs propagate the next iteration of reality that we experience as passing moments. This understanding is deterministic, and only deterministic, because the “creation” of understanding is built on intersecting moments…
Alt Title: Within Without: A Spinoza Gone Wild🤟🏽👺🔮
Existence a reaction we have a part in reacting to.
How can there be a point B if there is no point A? Point B will have to be point A. How can we approach point B from point A if point A is point B?
How can we have a destination without an origin? How can we get our bearings without a stabilizing context and how can the stabilizing context be ourselves rather than a beginning? What does it mean for us to be the answers we search the meaning of?
Part of me is Mos Def, part of me is Ma$e
So my jewelry be on, but my aura reek of sage
Positives and Black pride and all the shit I praise
Or hammers in the glove box that draw and then erase
Twenty on a bottle, so and so on a bird
One lead to the other, all that’s missing is words
Tell them word, the ills from up the hill that I was privy to
How it all be coded, but the scope in it be literal
When lookin’ for the salvation, there was a
Realization of a dream deferred that
Spawned from makin’ music for my friends and
Was all in celebration of us
And became All The Brilliant Things
Fuck around and have a dance with a demon, probably become it
Alt Title: Pragmatic Consequences of an Order Rearranged: On the Prevailing Belief in Creation as Guidance for a “Correctness” to Be Felt in Oneself & Creation as Conviction for “A” Direction: The Story of Victory Valance, Part I: An Introduction
Alt Title 2: Creation As Creation: This is the End, my…
Caw caw, bish
I’m shitting hard again, back up the dump truck
You underneath, then tough luck
I’m from where they call you a rat if you snitching
Struggle as process, process as pragmatism, pragmatism as struggle.
The recipe: I think of a topic. The topic gets summarized with a title. The title acts as a starting point to describe the topic.
Days after coming up with the title I found myself lying down on a massage table. …
Congruent categories that give the illusion of a free will that can only be understood by Möbius recursion.
Digested through set theory, we can depend on simple set axioms to “reach” an uncontroversial understanding.
Conclusions within the physical world correlated with beliefs. Beliefs which are isolated from the physical world by a re-application of skepticism between the impression the physical world constantly provides merely by our biological functions and the latent impression embedded and consistent with our physical “living” continuation.
The latent impression are prone to dogmatism but the first type of impression is what can be considered the “pure”…
Clarity crystal clear, that’s how I know a bitch in there
Controversial assumption in this piece of writing: Humans aren’t the only things with telos and the universe has a telos unto itself. This doesn’t mean that humans know the telos of the universe. Just that humans can extrapolate telos from their individualism and apply the concept to other objects. If things didn’t have purpose, we wouldn’t care about conserving the ecosystem. It doesn’t make sense that humans can point to purpose and say “we created the purpose, the universe did not.” Or “we can point to purpose…
Consider what effects, which might conceivably have practical bearings, we conceive the object of our conception to have. Then, our conception of these effects is the whole of our conception of the object.
This is pidgin. Not creole.
A need to communicate without access to formality. The formalization will first have to be organic, as we struggle to understand each other.
The struggle will lead to autonomy. Like a person weight lifting after a long period of training. …