The exactitude of daylight and the ways in which any amount of it could seem out of place, the prisms of concentration in that which is considered sightly or the volatility of reckoning real beauty. The spiral transforms and the limits of asymmetrical pull and push, the ways in which anything could grow and the intensities of immediacy in the structures of wonderment and the conditions of personalization of environment. The wanted conditions of light and the ways in which any amount of shade could bend a corner to new significance, the wonder of endless potentials in a finite universe and the ways in which data and information could stop or these pressing indicatives of the possibilities in silence, clarity and stillness as a seperate field or medium from which morphological movement can store and reckon its potential. The idea of needing to store anything, the idea of a necessity in medium where there needn’t be any, the actuality of nothing and the wanted figures of unrest and interest in that which is possible beyond imaginary, beyond sense, and beyond collective. The wanted mediums of morphological underpinning and the actuality of possibility in nothingness, in the actuality of there being no other, nothing from which everything could actually come. Imagined stillness and the dimensions of possibility in that which carries light or allots it, the wanted spinning indicative of motion and potentials, the elliptical nuance in that which is bent to sight and the turning of an image in mind, the light and electric within creating path and illuminating structures, optic chasms or chiasma, the wonders of space in which movement and transformations of image could condition sight to reckoning, which points of conjecture in cones or rods could fit something that has never been seen, how we are only met with circumstances we can handle? Data as nutrients and the transforms conditioning nutrients in gradient potentials as they are digested, data of traveling or movement the nutrient itself necessary to another place value. Immediacy and the ease of proximity, the necessity in limits of conditioned personalization and the wanted figures of indicative value and measure for that which is beyond sense and or perspective. Imagination and instinct, the ways in which any amount of data or information could be taking place, the perspective sense of light or shade and the wanted figures of unrest in that which is possible in that which is beyond, and that which is considered beautiful. Free thought.
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…
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.
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.
The ease of formulaic writing, the conditions of repetition and the concerns in cornering of possibilities in origins. The morphologic conditions of investment or indicative are ambiguous at best, the differences or similarities in timing or the differentiations in space: the conveniences of necessity or that which is proximal according to distance or consistency in difference or similarity in contrast to that which is symbiotic or that which actually grows, has balance and homeostasis in actual growth in accordance with environment and body. The distance imagined in thought or that which is supposedly beyond environment being attached to it, the suppositions in weighted distinctions of indifference and that which is obvious or the oblivion in that which is common or seems everyday: the intrinsic values of space and the wanted immanence in figures, the action and reaction do not necessitate function, the distances supposed do not exist to travel, the supposition of dimension in imaginary based on any part or wholeness of person or environment is faulty at best. The transcendental imagination is without a homeland: The exactitude [s!] of space for imaginal? Conditions of refinement in that which is melted down from outside of us in these metals between dimensions for moments of shapeliness in source-less electric stance making placement for path or convening pattern to movement in conversions of space from possible stillness, clarity and silence. The possibilities in vapor or the elements of actual thought and its pathos, the distinctions in that which is actual or imaginal, the physiological constructs of imagination and the patterns and paths created in source-less electric input from physiological sources. Imaginary is imaginary, the rhetorical situations in placement of potential, purely applied and the distinctions in persistence of any language in value or its placement in that which is beyond: possibilities of infinitum in that which is imaginary, the conditions of that which is cause or meaning or reason and the infallible suppositions of absolution in purity…applicable quantity or quality, ease in measuring the ifs or these confabulated excuses against logic: as if the variable contrivances of spaciousness in that which is ever always connected isn’t enough…silence, clarity and stillness exist. Empty space is a real possibility, silence is an answer, the actuality of connectivity and continuer isn’t really absolutely decidable, the variable allowances in data shouldn’t really be either…random? The actuality of possibility exists far outside of popular opinion and eclectic variant doesn’t automatically belong anywhere. Expectation and the diligence of wonder, the significance of thoughtlessness in creativity and that which is actually beyond, metaphysical data being a physiological construct, the idea of that which is beyond imaginary, beyond sense and beyond collective is still coming from a physiological perspective, and in this understanding I can’t trick myself as easily into believing my imagination for that which could be beyond, and can be more accurate in differentiation between that which is imaginary and that which is actual information or elsewise. Conditions for wonderment and that which is beyond, the actuality of accident and coincident, the asymmetrical beauty to nature that we can recognize, these accidents that we are and the ways in which nature works and changes, grows and moves. The possibility in accident and coincident as part of morphological movement and the necessity in a medium ‘beyond’, (clarity, silence, and stillness) does not necessitate wholeness of person-hood nor environment, nor offsets of immanence in presumed wholeness in environment, time, nor person-hood. The variability of matter and the distances between dimensions in vibratory patterns or that which is beyond timing, or presumed spaciousness: not beyond either but not in any assumption of wholeness nor perfected isolation of partiality, hopefully. Fourrier Gauss, Lorentz, movements shapeliness and the imagined fluidity to motion, impartial partiality and whole wholeness, or any other variant, that make the line drawn by Pascal seem almost fair, but my line of sight will never be anywhere below that line of water. Tricking myself into assumptions of observation is very easy, assumptions upon connectivity are even easier.
Variance in life, the actuality of variables in the wild and the absurdity of supposed isolation of connectivity from outside bias. The differences in defense and the actuality of senescence, instinct and imagination, intuition, the ways in which a body is attached to an environment or the ways in which environment seems to attach to the individual. The electrical and chemical reactions and conversions of space, the indicative value of that which is digested by the brain, the actuality of movement that we fill in for and the fluidity imagined in what we would probably actually see within us. The persistence of daylight and the ways in which the light within us or the light from outside of us interplay to exact the differences in the environment to usefulness within us. There’s no amount of rectifying the body goes through, this belonging or the sense of connection to the places around us is best pronounced in story and metaphor, the actuality of underlying principle in language and that which is actually accurate to it in that which we absorb as potentials or that which immediately becomes active. The idea that counting differences will ever add up to accuracy is faulty at best, similarities or differences in environment don’t add up to accurate messages or cause meaning and reason at all. The additive nature of that which is assumed connected or in some sort of continuation, and the reality of these chemical and electrical physiological reactions in imagination and mind, and the need for parable and underlying mythologies to describe and explain especially language and its continuations, but any supposed connectivity as well. The narrative chosen by outside interests will never be conducive to reality, and these additive narratives to that which happens in the wild are isolating the rustling of moths wings as though completely determinable as a cause of some disaster overseas. The ease of shallow assumptive connectivity and that which is actually working together for the whole, that does not need a false sense of isolation and that doesn’t need a faulty idea of connection to exist. Must be completely alone or entirely part of a whole, the idea of absolution in that which is assumed as though conducive in that which is symbiotic or common, the idea that deciding cause meaning and reason to these relationships in nature could be conducive to reality or the actuality of volatility and variability in nature is also faulty at best. The reality of these connections and continuances cannot be decided, indeterminable data that doesn’t need to be warped for special interests ideas of what nature should be saying to or for or about us. Remember the underlying principles in science and the the need in the human mind for myth. Myth is necessary to cognitive reasoning and critical thought, the ways in which underlying principles in science and the mythologies we apply to understand the ways in which the environment interacts with us or us with the environment, and while it sounds counter-intuitive can actually be extremely accurate. And oftentimes far moreso than any special interest deciding what the environment is ‘saying’ to us through any amount of confabulated non-sense connectivity or continuer that they’ve somehow decided could be decided and have now decided they can decide for all of us. These things are indeterminable.
Fluidity of motion
the dignity of dreams
wanting need, the electrifying
personified keeps going
endless continuance beyond any
friction: bending a corner
to a curve in one dimension
hoping against finite reality
Strands of possibility
timing relevance to placements
potentials from open air, empty space
all these sparks we never see
Dimming void to space friction
to shape, imaginal infinitum
in wanted perpetual motion
vapors, dreams, slipping relevance
ultimate constant universal
taking whatever time we have
with assurances of infinitum
Amelia Michelle Nicol 12.18.22
A word prompt to get your creativity flowing this weekend. How you use the prompt is up to you. Write a piece of flash fiction, a poem, a chapter for your novel…anything you like. Or take the challenge below – there are no prizes – it’s not a competition but rather a fun writing exercise. If you want to share what you come up with, please leave a link to it in the comments.
Weekend Writing Prompt #290: This weekend your challenge is to write a poem or a piece of prose in exactly 84 words using the word “Perpetual”.
The challenge is simple: each week you will be given an exact number of words you can use to write a poem or piece of prose. You can use any format or style you like; go wherever your inspiration takes you. The only rules are these:
The immersive values of space, the reformation of conditions in recombinative value and the assumptive weight of supposed order. The differences in decision making process and the thoughtlessness beyond actual attention, growing words and devices of instinct to consider surroundings as though some part or separation of them. The skies contained the weight of all these years of condensation, of evaporated movements, of these small parts of path that could reckon placement or pretend order for the sake of further disorder or every exception that becomes apparent upon any supposed perfection. The distal refrain of conditioned and formulaic narrative, the distance in space or timing for the differences in actuality or these details of recollection that seem to be every importance. The ability to forget, deciding what is important to me or that which I will or won’t need, the instinct and imagination for information, the differences between actual information and imaginary possibilities: chance happenstance and perchance suspicions of timeliness and these conditioned weights of care or importance, suspicion and superstition, myth and the ability to reason. Theory of mind in the American dialectic of behavioral science, the possibilities in exchange which have become so one-dimensional and the need for mythology. In hopes for discernment between mythology that helps reason and lies that harm information reliability: recognizing delineations between stories that help us grow, and the ways in which mythology works for us, and the ways in which lies and deceit harm cognitive reason, and real myth. Shallow proximities compared with underlying mythologies, the circumstantial sciences of proximities compared with the real science of underlying principles and their actual theories. In defense of poetry, the underlying rhetorical situations and the real mythologies in parable and metaphor that can describe and explain connectivity beyond shallow proximities and similarities in differences and etcetera: the actuality of accuracy in what is information science and the order of data and information. And jeopardy. The extremities of belief in science and the ways in which we actually connect with one another and our environment. It’s indeterminable. And cannot be decided. Science divining belonging and or deciding free will, infinitum, connectivity, knowing it is indeterminable and trying to ignore the volatility of indeterminable data. Pre-determined decidability is automatic detriment. Inopportune refinements of space and the hypnotic sentences of attention that grab or gap the relevance of actuality, the remorseless need to be free and the assumptive values of space or environment. Any supposed attachment or association, the power of assumption and association in the reckoning of connectivity and the continuer theory in additive or reductive conditions to that which cannot be created nor destroyed.
McSweeney’s 2000 “We are bored by entertainment, and entertained by boredom. Why shouldn’t we have slaves if we want them?” p.42 Pollack, Neal, Neal Pollack Anthology of American Literature, McSweeney’s, 2000
“The transcendental imagination is without a homeland.” Heidegger.
Imaginary a space and the indicatives of timing in the concentrations of attention or the relevance of reference in accordance with the potentials of already existing data and the limits of that which must be formed anew. The impressions of data in elicitation and the realizations of possibilities in triviality and the ever constant pull of same-ness and proximities triumphing over the more accurate and real, the paradox and parable in the phenetic actuality of real connectivity. Structureless shapeliness and the changing of a limb of thought like a snowflake falling to different patterns according to the atmosphere, grew another dimension and then melted it away, prisms of light instantaneously portraying image and picture, in no particular place, storing these visions and compliments of scenery in potentials and gradients for future shapeless patterns. These quadrants of digestion to exist and take apart that which has never been seen before, that which without perspective could never be heard. These other dimensions in mind, never given a perspective, cannot be real? Or can make false reality from physiological constructs response to imagined stimulus? These other worlds within us, of silence clarity and stillness, of things that do not exist anywhere else in this universe of constant motion and sound and noise: actual silence, actual stillness, imaginings of a present moment, now a past. Still frame capturing parts of motion that we then fill in for with Fourrier transforms, imagined fluidity creating parts of dimension in motion and imagination, new shapeliness to form image and texture, to create a space in which something within could be recognized. Newness becoming the boundary limits to potential and gradient, the data itself the path itself, data the nutrients necessary to physiological constructs of risk assessments and global alarm mechanisms, the ways in which new data reforms old, and the possibilities in anything being actually new. The fragments of any other path to be found, the same letters or basic body, forming something new, forming new limits of possible creation in the future, stopping points of form to solidify change within boundaries of what has been created in the past. Similarities and paradox in structure or bodily limit, the shallows of patterns of indicatives based on these faint aspects of evolutionary structure, that one cannot help but share, compared with the comparison of the deeper aspects of phenetic collocation, especially in imaginary and mental event, which are physiological constructs.
The ways of attention, the given references to the stacks left wonderment and the times needed to intensify the ideas of the great beyond, of that which is unseen. The ease of assumption and application of meaning to events that coincide or signify others, of all the ways in which connection becomes something else, a miracle or magic to invest in. Instances of semblance and resembling actions already taken or noted, the mischief in individualist action and the assumptive process of crowds. Simplicity and expectation taken to measure the resounding reference of identifying mental event and working for attachment or meaning without really intending to, the ways in which we automatically compartmentalize that which happens to us or that which doesn’t, the automatic repetitions of space and reference we wouldn’t even notice that we make. A coincidence is plenty, and accidents happen far beyond any meaning or application of intensity that we could come up with, bargains for the space necessary to legitimate wonder and confusion, for time beyond that instant gratification of mystical claiming needed to investigate the reality of whatever mental event could reckon attention, could make a sense of togetherness feel more possible or the weight of individuality seem more bearable. Dreams and visions, the exactitude of garnering weights of passage beyond the ease of claimant mysticism, beyond the fervor of religion and outside the constraints of skeptical refrain, the possibilities to remain open and a closure themselves in persistence and attention: given another glance, the capabilities of flesh compared with the overwhelming sense of spirit, of that which is beyond human understanding but which still gives us some forms of presence. As the wind, we know not where it comes from or where it is going, we try to name and claim based on what facts could be gathered of such instances, of coincident, of accident, but fall short in base absolutions and assumptions readied to apply and displayed as though the only option of meaning were already applied, already absolute, already a sure sight of significance with no option for mystery or unknowing. Be comfortable not knowing, understanding the tricks and gimmicks easily applied and convincingly misused for the sake of supposed knowledge, for absolute answers where there really are none. Leave alone the possibility, remarks of passing worried refrain and diligence in seeking out reality from concentrated levies of mystifying signs and easily taken regard in ambiguity and great guessing. Fabricative coincidence for guessing games of similar instancing or multiplexing in a multiverse with the ambiguity of validity: it’s a certain grouping mechanism and great guessing based on potentiality and repetition with monotony most of the time, practiced closeness and mystifying potentials garnered weights of passage slightly above chance and forever removed from humane regards of thought and its predicaments. The ease and magic of reading, of the potentials we form for words even before they’re seen or spoken, of the predetermination that does not decide free will, that only really works because of so many potentials for other instances that could work or become likely enough, of the chance and change of volatile nature that reckons with the prefabricated parts of the mind to become measures of freedom and the freedom of choice and individual speculation. Any possible action could pass through my mind, any imaginable choice could become a real option, but doesn’t, and needn’t. Doxastic responsibility for epistemological normativity: the responsibility for unconscious urges or for that which is beyond control in conditioning of environments over long periods of time, products of environment to a certain degree applying whatever meaning we have been conditioned with oftentimes without even meaning to. Responsible seeking of the great beyond and that which tends to hold attention or garner interest based on conditioned environments and formulaic assumptions of past and future, of the here and now. What gets or is given attention, supposedly, and the obviousness of the ambiguity of validity: if ambiguous enough, any amount of guessing could seem accurate to a situation, and if practiced enough in monotonous and repetitive space, could try and attach meaning to any action as though some form of reaction or etcetera. In hopes for discernment, patience and diligent seeking of the reality of the situations made from mental event, given as unreal monuments of possibility and taken for absolute meaning. Diligence and the timing of forethought that needn’t be applied to great guessing games of the fake meaning given any amount of plain coincident or accident. Accidents happen, coincident is plenty.
The ephemeral distance between thoughts, the given anecdotes to distraction and the want for focus, the details and humdrum converging in limits to condone wonder: what tends to hold attention, what parts of thought are deemed important enough to actually participate in the medium of the mind and how many thoughts do we imagine or have that are never actually noticed? That which is just beyond thought and the thoughtfulness it takes to wonder about it, strange instances of conundrum and paradox, conversions of space that continually change and manifest more distances and possibilities in the spaces between wondering. Excitements and presentations of interest, the focal points of intensity and the ways in which voice is noticed internally: wind blowing through empty spaces of contemplation and deriving the postulates of contriving impression or actuality in mental event. At what point is it an actual mental event? How far and removed from any number of them could anyone be or become? Physiological constructs of imaginary spaces, of thought, mental and imaginary event consorting in focal devoid patterns according to potential and gradient, according to free will and the ability to actually focus upon any given matter. What differences would there be beyond record, and how close could any really get to the actual instance of thought or imagining? Impressions of space and the contrivances of manipulation, easily seen and avoidable messes of consciousness assured of absolutes and conditioning according to potential alone, as though that were all we really are…areas of the brain lit with excitement, dualism automatically incorrect, the distance from physiological presence imaginable, and as real to me as imaginary space: dualism and monism, that we cannot be separated from these physiological forms but is it possible we actually create imaginary spaces from physical space that exists? Could both simultaneously be correct? The doubtful concordances of interest and the want for the matter of mind to be recorded accurately, how far could we separate these simple machines from the ghosts within them? How far could thought be from the body and how close to actual record of it have we really gotten? Fallible writing, as close as one could get to the actual instance, but still far and removed: thoughtlessness and nothingness in writing and the distances imagined between thought and its record. Is writing actual record of imaginary and mental event, or something else? A formulate of the spaces between these simple machines and the ghosts within them or wanted record of the possibilities in inspiration and potentials being met as we make them for ourselves. Free thought and the want for accurate record of imaginary and mental event, of the distances from physiological space that are possible in imagination and inspiration, the exactitudes of excitement and impressions of reality from space that is anything but. Imagining ways to thoughtfulness, to constructs of thought and its capabilities, of that which could be imagined separated from these simple biological machines and the need for accurate record. It is a physiological construct of data regardless, and depends upon sense to be described: imagining these separations may be as close to any actual separation as we ever get. If I imagined it hard enough, I could be a glass of water, and everything and everyone in my environment would agree with me. I don’t want to trust my imagination for reality, but is it possible that non-matter and non-space manifest from within physiological construct? What aspects of spirituality are allowed in this type of discussion and where does that leave thought and its accurate record?
Missing Section? Big Ideas, abstract largeness, free thoughts particians from the state are to be found in solid universities and colleges, much easier to bear and more difficult to differentiate that in the Poor Man’s University. The Library as the greatest tutor. The actually free educations offered in the United, Stated truently, the Library or […]
The differences and similarities in defense, the instinct and imagination necessary to thought and that which is beyond focus or attention. The distances of thoughtlessness and the contrivances of daylight, the fragments of movement in falling or rotting motion, the distinctions of space in that which is distal or the space imagined empty or blankness, the silence clarity and stillness of physiological construct and the ways in which movement escapes memory. The ability to forget imagined blank space to fill in potential, resting and active conditions of interest or investment and the stillness of that which is remembered or these supposed absolutes in conditions for separations between thought, memory and imaginary, the actuality in that which is senescence, the differentiation in any perspective: supposed limits of imagination or these portions of daylight parted to particularity in prisms of shade and the shapeliness of shadow, these dimensions of invention and the wanted supposition of timing for difference or these places beyond time, these definite physiological spaces and their actuality in constructs of chemical and electrical conversions of conditioning and environment. The actuality of that which is mental and imaginary event cannot be decided, let alone the differences in thought, memory, and imaginary, the actuality of that which is measurable and the distances in charting, the portions of position in potentiality and that which is always partial. The idea of wholeness in environment or timing tricking into flim-flam belief in distances that don’t measure up, in perspective sense to beset entire environment based on imagined meaning, cause, reason or whatever could be manufactured of the absolute divination or ‘divining’ of what must be information or imagination, what must be mental and imaginary event, whatever [biased systemic] perspective could singularly decide for an entire crowd the differences in their own perspectives. The accuracy in that which is imaginal, there is no particular place or value to the imaginal, there are no set limits and never will be. Imaginary is imaginary. The exactitude of instinct and imagination, the ways in which imagination could seem to be shared in shared environment or the ways in which connectivity and continuer depend upon imagination, the imaginal and the perspective sense of that which is actually analogous to me and my movement and action and behaviors. The difference and similarities in proximity and paradox don’t make as much sense nor hold as much accuracy as decent myth or fable and parable in poem of rhetorical situation, and how many myths does any one lake have about it? And how many yellow submarines could investigate with no recourse? These figures of interest and the curiosity usually figured in that which is beyond sense or these perfections of guessing games for similar instancing the ease of connectivity in that which is formulaic and that which is isolated. The discretion in that which is first and the morphological underpinnings of suppositions on deep time that mean the assumption of a wholeness that does not exist and apriory of perspective in environment sure of influence or connection that does not either and that has no need. The necessity in nature and the volatility of change and difference, especially defense, the volatility and beauty of change in nature and that which is reckoned as though decidable. The underpinnings of morphological weight or the conditions of reference and record tricking us into portrait assurances of being that do not make sense. Random data and the generalities of that which is actual, the differences in decision and these portions of daylight meeting dust within me, the source-less electric within contrasting in electric with these prisms of natural light, creating shades of dimensions and conditioning reality to placements of value and perceptions of stillness. The figures of solidity and the vibratory patterning between different states of matter, stated differences in vapor or the conditioned leniency in swamp gas and the reality of wanted wonder producing amazement no matter what. Self fulfilling prophecies and cognitive distortions [personalization] upon space and time, the suppositions of supposed wholeness and the assumption of stillness that cannot be applied. Purity, naturally and applicability in that which needs to and does definitely exist, the silence clarity and stillness in nature and the perception of cause, reason or meaning therein, the want for actual underlying principle instead of shallow proximity paradox and circumstance. Symmetry and asymmetry in lighting?
Thoughtlessness, the values of space and pause, the distances in reloque and that which contains or exists within, the limits to environmental variable and assumptions upon space beyond me, these portions of daylight we could pretend to contain, a flashlight or the scatter of its light to any point it reaches, the limits of measurement and the saturation of notice or that which is contained within the light released with sight and feeling, the differences in supposed containment and the instruments of usefulness that could even pretend to produce this light from within or pretend to contain anything illuminated by it. A bright bulb that glows with the after effects of being lit, ([why?]) the alpenglo that lights prisms of disappearing in sunset, caught in portions of horizon escaping in color, illuminated paths of glancing. The same exact sunrise or set will never happen, the distances in what could be illuminated by invention, the best I could do for beauty is shadow puppets against the assurances of illuminations belonging or any part brought to that light suddenly distorted, closed to the saturation of this one beam, this memory which could escape in all this light within, could refuse and escape the mean glare of artificial light.
Magnificence, the notable or granting contrivances of vision according to the imaginary space that digests information beyond our actual senses. The metabolism of dreams or the lifespan of an imaginary event: postulates of figures we contrive in the divisions of laborious task, time and the management of the process we imagine having influence over. Convinced significances of desecration and the limits given in normality or the conditions of constantly changing while remaining the same wholeness. Sense for wholeness, metabolism of lifespan, the things that are supposed to stay dead. Lost cause and missing information, the friction of inspiration or the myth of motivating factors beyond actual accident or coincidence. Any cause, any more meaning, the necessary to opportunity or the needed for controlled commons. Measured significance, magnifies the splendid to whatever perspective seems befitting, momentary gifts or drifts, inspiration and the naming of imaginary events to the meanings we are as portrayal. Reconvenes the harshness to quandry of possibility, the driven endings to the deadened past: proximal limitations to personhood. Figures, the parting actualities frequent the lost or damaging missing pieces, blame the mis-fitting knowing nothing was never meant for a place. Hold lonesomeness to no place, divert the easily mistaken horribly confused mysticism for the balancing of actual coincidence. Whole organisms, unto self alone, these constantly shifting axis points reconvene the daytime to splits in jarred textures of medium, cut diadem like a cation to a non-sense region, splatter vernacular randomness for coincidental absorption. Picking up random lettering schemes in charted lists of the possibilities between the numbered significance. Nominal nomials, the best wishes for actually picking out what symbols tend to take to certain cutting or edging, the figures that define and derive us in shapeliness imagined as event in mind. Envisioned precision to imaginary events and charting the significance as though any cause or meaning would be ready and applicable irregardless, and ever must be part of some sort of longer list. Options in opportunism, whatever yuh needed…
In the invariability and constraint of assumption and potential, nature does not plan the future, nor does it need to. Nature a separate field or innate and departed from us, knowledge as separate field and the tendency to assume infinitum: the apriory of infinitum in the assumptive potential of interaction or environment. The habitual and innate, variability and volatility: nature doesn’t need guess work for future problems, and solves them as advancement irregardless of the options or obstacles. That which knowledge of nature could never reach and decidable limits to the possible combinations of instances of interaction with environment. Knowledge and inspiration as innate and also entirely apart from us, imaginary to be assumed beyond biological construct is a mistake, and a dangerous one. Imaginary is a physiological construct of silence, clarity and stillness as physiological constructs of non-space or nothing. These spaces within the body that could very well produce such actions and reactions as those that would be necessary to guessing games of similar instancing are prevalent and common throughout the body, especially in inflammation and retention in plasticity. Knowledge beyond knowledge, these imaginary confirmations of suppliant skill share and the persistence of individuality as the obvious goal in most growth, nature as knowledge in separate field, a part of nature and the idea itself of being so separate, that very same capability in imagination. The indescribable sense of imaginary beyond words for sense, the idea of all-knowing and everything and that which knowledge of nature could never reach in imaginary space. Knowledge beyond nature? Incessant power of suggestion and the inopportune accident and coincident claimant to removals and refusals of any claiming of personas of conditioned expression and motion confused for emotion in the ideas of body and being. Shapeliness beyond the devices of space, of self, illimitable imagination and the powers of confabulation. Disenchanting and formulaic refusals of misinterpretations’ dangers and the trepidation of mind and being beyond oneself imagining as though separate or innate. Could only ever be in one place at one time, imaginary is imaginary and the transforms of possibility and capability in blind spots and great guessing have lost entire centuries of rhythm and information to paradox and proximity. Volatility and the risk assessments intended to curtail progress especially cater to systems with the most upset and counter-reactive possibilities in transforms, too dangerous and confidential, these natural constructs of imaginary space and the ease of misinterpretation in differencing machines. How could we measure our differences to nature, were we not so far beyond in imaginary? We have inventions to tell us we’re so much more separate, to assure us of our safety from the wilderness. More variants and volatile seeming situations are necessary to growth, and nature depends upon growth in homeostasis, not defeats and competitions. Not safety. Nature doesn’t guess, but grows: cannot be wholly separate or definitely innate, and doesn’t necessarily construe knowledge.
The differences in sight and the catching of a glance in diagonal, the Gutenberg diagonal and the capability in focus and organization of field. The limits of the ideas of focus, the mythological perception that our eyes narrow in on parts of our environment actually means that other parts are then out of focus or blurred. The ways created by lenses and the capability in the human brain to try overcompensating for the bifocal polar regions inability to narrow down the input information beyond hexagons for a curtailing assumption in quadrants of sight or linearity in distinction of frame. Eyes cast aside mean the same for each pair, each part of the same sequential movement and accommodation of environment in the mythology of stillness or infinity. Temperature and movement as determinants of time beyond assumptions of eternity or infinity depend upon imaginary space and discern in accordance with the accomidations to infinitum that assume stillness and silence as well. Inward creation, to have happenstance in meaning and cause according to expression or derivatives of recombinative assumptive sight in variants of visions from assumed imaginary space and the connectivity in apriory. Freedom of association, especially of the things that must have captivated us or attention, that must have been of notice or note to us based on postural reflexes, or what the assumed cause and value of the connection could or would be. The conventions and inventions of interactions and the environment’s coercion of imaginary event in conveying meaning to happenstance and causation/continuer. Caused or continued, only an assumption of conglomerated endings would confer the idea of everything being continued (infinitum) and/or of everything having “cause” or purpose. How could coincident be recorded accurately by time or resemblance in instancing of moments of particularities in isolation?! Happenstance and coincident maybe aren’t a “cause” for the measure of time. Accuracy in the record of imaginary event and the differentiation of self from imagined interactive parts of the environment, from every single little connection that meant part of self on a shelf. Actual accident or coincident, when assimilated in meaning or attachment to event, leave mythological record of simultaneity of event and coincident of happenstance. Actual information in the mythology of time and the records of supposed similarity making the record of actual coincident and imaginary more difficult in expectancy limits and inaccurate risk assessments based on pendulums and the expectation of event to prometheate eventuality and the ease in timing for inaccurate record of similarity and assimilation.
The differences in attention to the great beyond, the mystical claiming of coincidence and the portions of accident used as though applicable when barely attached based on simple ambiguity. The usefulness of the ideas of the spirit, the exactitude of wanted space from the incessant guessing games for fabricative coincidence that could apply meaning from any environment, that could become any amount of doxastic responsibility if tried hard enough. The exchangeable limits of reason and the chances that mean freedom of choice and will beyond any predetermination of thought or capability in guessing. The ease of application of any amount of accident or coincident to a monotonous repetitive environment, the seeking out of actual reality beyond the ease of mental event applied to any instance of thought or action. Beyond any guessing at knowledge predetermined or ill caste before us, there is possibility at other chance, at choice, at change. Free will and the bargains against it: the great guessing of environments becoming a problematic sense of determination of mental events, coalescing the outer limits of reason and purchasing chance refrains of potentiality and slivers of environment projecting parts of itself from epistemological norms. Envisioned possibilities in the ideas of mystical claiming as they usually are, applying absolute meaning and attention given no option of actual digestion and deciding intrigue based on the impossible limits of attentive gaze: accidents happen, coincident is plenty. The ambiguity of validity assuring sights of great guessing while leaving truth to portent and tales of mental events and their grand experiences: the need for discernment and patience in regards to any amount of mystical or skeptical claiming. The meaning applied to any coincident, to any chance speculation of that which is slightly beyond us, to real change in the volatility of nature and the possibilities not taken as absolutes. That which we automatically assume or have been conditioned to accept or defer based on past experiences and current environment becoming blinders to the reality of that which cannot be claimed or maimed by chance reason found in coincident or accident. That no matter how warped and unjust any amount of coincident or accident could become, and far beyond any application of mental event to any amount of meaning wanted from them, chance choice and individualist free will exist and permeate far beyond the predetermination that finds its ease in applicative coincident or accident. It is predetermined that we have free will. That which holds attention cannot be bargained for, and the ambiguity of validity can prove itself time and again in great guessing at coincident and accident that needn’t be claimed to a certain meaning to have resonance, that don’t control actual chance or real choice and that cannot be expected to any one mental event’s significance.