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.