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” “objective” chemical reaction our body sustains merely by being “alive” (consistent with the mental phenomena of our awareness; although our awareness can recursively be understood again by the dogmatic second type of impression that is latent and “constructed” from the first type.

The “second type,” ironically, clashes with the physical/phenomenological occurrence of “you.” That is, the way “you” is understood is through “meaning;” meaning that is just “a” second type construct of the first type of construction.

The first type is “objectively determined.” The second type is constructed with a reactionary Will that establishes not just the meaning of objectivity, but also a criticism of objectivity. Physically speaking, meaning can be understood as established by the consequences of developmental psychology. But again, that would just be “a” construct of second type of impression. Just because the construct can be understood and trivialized as a set of the Möbius recursion. “A” because the construct can be equally understood by a different set of axioms.

Axioms in this case are rules like “+” in “2+2=” results in “4.” There is a set of rules for “+” that when integrated with numbers result in a particular relationship between the numbers. We understand Reality via relationships established between existential axioms of the Will and objective Reality.

Instead of thinking about sets of arithmetic rules, we can think of existential sets of feminism rules. And then we can think of existential sets of understanding reactions based on biological sets or chemical. sets. And then we can think of congruent sets between following feminist axioms and chemical or biological axioms.

We can also think about our group identity and how our identity has to be congruent with group work in such a way that the groups integrates us the way we want to be integrated.

blooms — crazy rants masked as abstract experimental philosophy. s/o CS Peirce