there are some things in life. . . that if not worth accentuating - we would deliver from them - the kind of moral hijinx which so many people in society create.
If you^ can fathom from that 'moral hijinx' is in definition: what I mean by 'hijinx' as it equates with morality. I believe that in my own cynical view of life, there is an equal part of cynicism between what is actually happening from sensory experience. (Plato's 'Euthyphro')
Some clear examples of this are of random moments, that in my recent past, I would defy were something of a moral hijinx - or better explained - inexplicable behavior based on my view of it.
Perhaps, - I could be wrong in my theoretical approach - I would only care to prove it. Therefore, it is with such objective I concern my trivial aspect with a certain nature of cause and effect. (This means, one cannot cause a moral duty to predicate the logical opinion of mine. / Plato's 'Euthyphro') What I am in fact inferring is a method, from which I attempt to ratify how my personal experience bestows my psychological nature as received from my interlocutor.
I am aware, that Nietzsche was theoretically able to create a metaphor which proved that abstract models are in the universe as we are unaware of such transparency is in fact relevant. Therefore, when we hold our highest self-examination in the highest order, 1 being least to '10' being greatest. Where are we in that variable moment within, between order - time - awareness although in no particular order. Therefore, we have a thesis from which only order can exist, in maintaining such epistemological antipathy.
If you find a thing that is weak - and in its place you exploit such a weakness that it deploys it's awareness. Is that a part of man vs. man - in which case a weakness is being driven by a moral hijinx. Therefore, in the case of a singularity - if in this case an opportunist were inspired only due to circumstance or competitive capitalist virtue, as long as man = 'x'. Man will reveal the reward of exploiting man 'y' for exploiting a variable weakness. Thus, awareness is to seek in all things being equal a form of pleasure principle vicarious to awareness.
This should prove that if the above^ paradigm of awareness is a mans ability to reason, that man 'x' exploits man 'y', the ability to produce pleasure thereby determines a moral hijinx. As I defined this analogy between 'x' and 'y' both man produces the same material awareness as based - it is moral hijinx.
The question then remains a critical examination of the variables which create mans moral hijinx. To investigate the causes that should result in a division of awareness for the greater good. Therefore, the question between awareness/moral hijinx is to separate the dichotomy which man himself creates in a random chaotic episode of several possibilities.
I use myself as an example, that in this manner of blocking my personal affliction toward man/or/woman - that man is 'y'. It is man 'y' that exhibits such tendencies to ponder a variable of exploiting my weakness is so obvious in fact. I am fully aware of this in my order, based on (part) experience; the other (part) relationship. Both awareness/time make up my sense within past 'order'.
As my senses developed a hypothetical affliction between this estranged ex-girlfriend, I had made no particular advancement in greeting or acknowledging her existence. She befuddled me with what I call a moral-hijinx.
In this situation, I felt as though a man with all encompassing knowledge compares to a person with no more or less awareness of it. Therefore, how my theory holds true, can only benefit the rival of choice, or in this instance.
As my moral hijinx was taking place, my awareness shifted to the sense of object I became, as if I was being held accountable to live a lie whether it generated pleasure or deceit. It is in that sense the moral hijinx as I became more aware of what was happening, I grew immune to the level of tolerance that perhaps I acquired a skill of immunity to.
My better knowledge immediately replicated itself to trust the better of my instinct, rather than knowledge base pleasure principle. They became one in the same.
The moral hijinx as I can now describe it, was defined due to a parody or satire that was generated only due to false desire which my ex-girlfriend imposed her will as a manner of speaking, to 'test' my weakness. She wanted to know if she in fact was an object of her affection (moral hijinx) rather than encompassing wisdom (pleasure principle). Unless you decode the potential variables (order), she was deliberate in miscommunicating my boundaries or lack thereof intention without my permission (weakness).
Much of my theory regarding moral hijinx is displayed within the work-place, between time and space, common sense, reasoning, friendships whether they be in regard to several factors is no matter. The objective between altering awareness into a duality that moral hijinx occurs, can only reflect a personal refrain.
==============
So after all that^ I realized something. . . that yes - even in the act of someone you literally wrote off can still come back to haunt you. The lesson: was how people who think they're so much smarter than you fall short on how ignorant they probably hoped you are.
No comments:
Post a Comment