I wrote this post in 2017.

Fear the potentials of where your thoughts would mislead you, the hiccups between the steps you take in wondering about something; the accidents that trip us up during a day. The loud sounds and furious added weight to every motion in noticing it for yourself. Occupy your own thought or someone else will occupy it for you. The fear and shame felt at the dagger of danger and the surety of death. Killer attitude; my movement will defend itself against the instigation that is always present. Slip on the job, accidental death and suicides amongst workers and damned be the one actually thinking about it. Caught either cringing or gagging or hiding someplace; relax, the world is full of obstacles designed to kill you and you are here to work on them. Nature, the grinding machine of timing compared to the steps we are able to take during the work day and how far away from your process you are during the actual performing of tasks. How far away from the way in which you naturally think must you drag yourself to be wondering and fathom such machinery? Humans do not think or behave in a binary. These toxic chemical spills to electrical outlets, the metals and wiring that intersects and construes itself beyond the parts lists in memory of movement and its postulate. The sounds the engine makes, the motor running and gaps in distance to each chug and lurching whinny or guessing instance for the garbled proctor or shifting safety teams misunderstanding what exactly it is they are doing just standing around during a day. Each postural reflex strikes a certain chord, but don’t upset yourself about it, there are all sorts of extensions to deliver you from particular prongs. Don’t get hung up, don’t fixate, the answer is itself and continual. This life is so full, brimming these airs we fill with toxins, these poisons we administer systems for their working mechanisms are killing us. Mechanic longings like general study of the human body; notice the refusal to compare a car to our bodies. Misery and calamity, the drive down lines of understanding and the ticks we experience as becoming more part of the machine than nature. Computers comparing the workmanship of men with machinery; causing more accidents to their work process. The feeling of always being watched or as if you’re having to show, compared to the feeling of just workmanship. Having to be more heavily guided by authority figures at the job sight is probably part of this same complex. The occurrences of accidents at job sites and the likelihood that anyone watching you had anything to do with it are null and void to most; but the power of collective gaze cannot be denied, and the effects and affects of certain environmental aggregates on work process cannot be ignored. The more delicate you try to be, the more difficult it is at times to actually operate; the more stout and present you are poses entirely different obstacles. Watching a workman too closely, you notice them fumble or curse or ask you to go and get them something; the sense that our lives are a sort of performance of our own attitudes and behaviors and the ability to separate oneself from the misery or calamity to show skill. Fear and the fulfillment of actual motive compared with motif. Motives and drives, surrounding passing contortions of reality from a periphery and the interruptions to process that are necessary, and those that need eradicated. How are you to decide in cognitive risk assessment which information will eventually be of use to you, and that which you must discard? Remembered myself as saying that it really isn’t a conscious decision and I can’t always trust my own brain or emotion. Avoidance of the moral detective brigades and the ability to function on a daily basis in some job sights necessitates being un-bothered by certain etiquette and temperance in yourself and others. Tetanus shots car wrecks worried mind and paranoid ticks of infrequent laziness and the things that pop in your head. The etiquette that says temperance cannot be learned but spouts from the pages of logistic and common American noble thoughts. It’s terrible temperance to speak of it at all, especially in comparisons. No testing, don’t get testy…


Beauty & Volatility

Measureless weight, the indicatives of silence and that which escapes notice, the obviousness and that which is digested without realizing it. Divination of expectancy and that which is actual or the focus in environment, conglomerated bias cannot escape bias, the formulaic excitements of space and that which tends to reckon with the emptiness, these bright skies reflecting off the top layer of snow, the brightness of the daylight and the particles already charged with negative ion inference at high altitudes. The distinctions in that which is possible or that which seems likely are easier in formulaic, repetitive space that doesn’t have a lot of variety. These mountains faces, they change so slowly, the river cutting new paths of valley could tell you how long ago these features started working toward this scenery, a wanted part of the scenery or this environment sinking into the backgrounds of that which is often overlooked or completely ignored, the dissonance in that which is similar or difference, these conversions of matter to space that can be sensed, all this floating in the air just beyond that. The distinctions of conditioning and that which seems likely or possible compared with that which is actual and real. Of all the connections I could imagine with the environment around me, with all of us that are part of any environment, how could any variable of wild information be isolated effectively for focus? All this imagining that I must have this partiality, that this wholeness is also part of me, the variable indicatives of nature and that which tends to draw attention: missing parts of conjecture and the focal devoid patterning of that which cannot be avoided. The background adding to any actual point of focus or attention, the ways in which imagination and instinct separate body and message, these conditioned limits to what might be important to me from an environment and the technologizing of the imagination. Would we even notice? Over stimulation and frequency interruptions to that which we are able to imagine, and the ways in which we can digest the environment around us. The empty chairs sitting in open wilderness, the easy images of escape imagined in places that should never feel so crowded. Free will and free choice, memory and movement, the distinctions of that which is digested as part of sight or assumed in automatic message, the additive nature of that which is noticed, the immediacy of idea and ideal attached to objects, scenery and people, the connectivity assumed in any amount of that which could be similar or different but, why not just let it be? The necessity of note and investments of timeliness in that which is abstract and conceptual. Rhetorical situation and parabolic understandings of that which could actually formulate togetherness beyond shallow similarity or difference. The ways in which information goes together doesn’t have to compete. The exactitude of the connectivity and continuer will always be an opinion of the observer. Impressions or expressions, the indicative values of space and that which in leading lines, emphasis, color and texture relate the world around us to chemical and electrical investments we can actually use. The sightliness of anything, the wanted beauty and the actuality of ugliness, the considerate values of that which is noticed or ignored, the need for beauty in nature and the volatility and beauty in natural change. Would the notice of ugliness with the same amount of wonder and focus and love as that which is ugly help or hinder survival? All these beautiful, poisonous plants, animals: the beauty in nature often wants to attract us only for prey. Natural beauty must have industriousness? The need for and even worship of beauty and the actuality in the idea that most of the beautiful organisms are poisonous. Is part of the need for beauty in the change in nature the need for self-defense, the need for attention to beauty to distract from adaptation and add automatically to survival?

The ugliness (beauty?) in survival and the beauty in change, volatility in either…

Distinctions of space, the timeliness of movement these conditions of suppositions, these lights beyond perspective, the diligence of daylight these magnitudes of pull from the reflections on the face of the moone, these delicate-seeming excitements and the swans that belonged here or there to begin with. These exceptional distances beyond in thoughtlessness, the distances imagined worth traveling, these perfections unnatural ugliness and the actuality of asymmetrical balance in the beauty and volatility of natural change and movement—the figures of excitement or the imagined closeness or closure of movement, continuer theory: a universe of constant motion, the wanted semblance in that which cannot help transference, the supposed connections of movement taken out of situation, away from figure and out of character cannot be accurate. Any supposed closeness another closure of assurance in that which must be connected or moving, assumptions on timing indicatives and the actuality of continuer and connectivity beyond similarity or difference, beyond shallow claimant supposed togetherness. Assumptions upon motion and perfection are not realistic, the actuality of motion and its indicative change in nature isn’t going to be isolated by assumptions of similarity or difference, nor assumptions of connection nor continuance.

Continuer Theory

Source-less electric and the imaginal infinitum, the ways in which electricity moves us, the ways in which that which is beyond sense attributes to it. That which is actual of perception in environment and that which is automatic in response, the distinctions of space and that which is actual movement or reflex. The divination of breath and the differences in similarity, that which is parable or underlying principle compared with shallow proximal expectancy. Individualist conditions of actuality in that which is wholeness or part, in that which is decidable as though a wholeness or part of perception from outside of it: I can only have perspective analogous to my own perspective alone (Hinton), expected perspectives and the weighted turn of phrase in that which is beyond epistemic normativity and that which cannot be stopped with threats of Empiricism. All knowing environments of absolutist assumptions upon reflex and spaciousness, upon breath or the care with which any movement is taken. The fluidity imagined in motion, butterflies in the divide of mind, supposedly split so easily: conditions of growth and understanding, to assume we already know and forget seeking it out. The staving off of actual scientific inquiry and research for the assimilation of Earth to technological disadvantage and university-ality that doesn’t actually apply doesn’t make sense. The ambiguity of validity could pretend there’s enough context anyplace, the variations of chemical and electrical conversions from environment and internally cannot be guessed at or rectified in accordance with any system-ic, and especially any unnatural system. The actuality of volatility in change and the volatility and beauty in that which is actual in nature cannot be reformed nor escaped. These differences imagined in the light from within or without, in the differences imagined between information and imagination, the conditions of actual recombinative value and the actuality of truly random or chaotic data…The collocation and allocation of word and expression in etymological normativity, which should never really entirely belong anyplace…Transcendentally, the curvature of shapeliness in mind finding points of referent shapeliness in thoughtlessness and ever more Tender Buttons to push, the ambiguity of validity and the oblivion of obviousness again, repetitions and the ease of confabulation. Decisions supposedly made for us and that which the environment could take of free will or free choice: Boethius takes a seat in the chair described by Gertrude Stein, both almost disappear. The decidable meaning is all yours. These differences in the ways in which anything could form or become, belong, how many tree rings did one chair eat up, how many tireless hours cutting down dead limbs and re-shaping them to something worthwhile, something of comfort and courage creating seats that can remain empty for the reminder of space that cannot be filled. Thoughtlessness, the ways in which these forms find mediums, the conditions of perception and that which seems close or proximal but when applied in mythology makes no sense. Or, when applied in rhetorical situation, holds no common stance. Or, in defense of poetry, that which can or cannot hold up in the phatic atmosphere of everyday exchange. Anything could continue or ‘work’, the differences in that which is actual of Charles Van Doren’s works in continuer theory and what has stuck around of what was falsified of his information is a continual reminder of just how far a universal lie would go to seem applicable anywhere. Anything could continue, it depends upon the will of the observer, as Leonard B. Meyer was certain of, as well. Removal from free choice will never be disproof of free will. 120 is always missing.