top of page
  • Writer's pictureAmelia Nicol


Will, will yourself to tell yourself to formulate a possible relevance for testing experimentally the possible acceptance or foregoing of a concept like will before you decide to embark upon thought experimentation with urges and possible mishaps like audio syncratic autonym or Since its must already be running continuously, and has no add or subtraction of catching or rebounding, the postulate to think of thought before thinking of it does not depend on a field or source separate from our existences in body— that which we must ‘seek’, nor does it depend upon knowledge which is solely innate. Biological construction of formulate posturing for further formulate. There is only perspective or perception that is analogous to my perspective; any other is, at least, filtered and digested in the bias of my own medium of being. An experiment to test an idea for accuracy asking for an experiment to test the idea; asking logically if logical referendum seems so absurd as my thoughts do at times in digesting. et. The only perspective I can have is analogous to my own perspective alone; even the times I recognize outside influence even from a channeling or sense of telepathy, I must also recognize that those supposed perspectives of certain shared bias do not necessarily correlate with the actuality of what is being communicated, and is actually an off-standing postulate or peripheral type perception in sense of a bodily chemical and electrical reaction that corresponds in radiating bias for instances of refraction in digestive motif. The decision to digest a part of information or a piece of data is not an absolute decision; just as will cannot be tricked to ever make the entirety of a decision other than aloud, the mind continuously digests any decision making anyway, and works continuously for its manipulative power in other mental and thought situations— the idea that any decision is an absolute one is that which has bred this culture of ultimatums in decisions; either one or the other in some polar opposition based on dominance in idealism. There are all sorts of ways to trick someone into thinking there are less options to consider than there are; if told there are only one of two ways, tell them to count from one to zero. The responses we have been taught to understand as acceptable to any given circumstance are endlessly variable and depend on the characters involved, as well as the figures in motion and motif; even our own learned responses morph endlessly according to place and application. Surmise to control a potential action and you are therein propagating the action itself; speculation and accredited conundrum is detestable at best and reminds one of crime or mystery novels, at worst a horror show of thoughtlessness. If you are going to work so hard at speculation, you may as well prospect deviance instead of drawing such inspiration from what we have been convinced is the main stream. Though, even most of the supposed main stream is well convinced that they are some sort of minority. Margins collecting like interstitial consequence in understanding the pestilence of modernist wording and the plague of morality. There are no absolutes to function under, and the free thought afforded by most of the reactionary reply to such complaint is tortuous of itself in extremes. Forced reply in ultimatums of concentrate based in buzzwords and irrational complaint seem destruction in themselves of the very will toward free thought in individuals. Vulgar dismemberment of phantom limbs reasoning for their bodily personages, shaking fearsomely and coming to loathe the consistency of betrayal hidden as mystery and play. We have conspired with each other for the careful destruction of language, the careful stitching of ligament and awful smell accompanied by abrupt, skilled fingers tying quick knots with instruments to loosen and balance our own positions with tongues. Mouths gathered space for wind in grimacing or showed agape to give space in reconsidering a view point. Dionysian duality or Descartes’ dichotomies and only a binary of options to consider or respond with; ten whole digits and a looping medium for relevance understanding the fight to not make a choice or decision at all. I do not have to decide, I do not have to agree or disagree, and that does not mean I do not understand you; though apparently there is plenty of misunderstanding. Extreme and altruist in response according to your own deceptions, as if you could remember every way your mind has chosen to trick you into seeing the world “right side up”.

0 views0 comments

Recent Posts

See All
bottom of page