and I wish I could express more how little I really care about the mundane, page-filling lives of all these fictional characters; don’t we already have enough mundane, enough to fill our own lives?
and maybe my experience is unusual, but in all my life I reached out and felt nothing matching, only half-hearted or no-hearted connections, and so what kind of attachments can be had for half the whole-hearted who still haven’t succumbed to the evolutionary tug of cold-hearted survival, induced by bad economics
specialization is a problem; no one knows how the other thinks, or what they know; and speech, I think, is slow and imperfect and so dependent on momentary remembrance, and so, and so, as information grows, explanation suffers.
have you ever caught someone in your eye who you love without cause and without impetus, who you imagine, impossibly, you must have truly loved in another life? all these strange romantic visions make the future worth living, and dreaming, in theory – if we were only all more the fools.
and is there an inhuman fabrication on top of reality, which we take as real, which is driving us to madness as it shapes or fails to civilize us?
civilization is, and always has been, the art of risk reduction
but there is so much isolation in the disapproving crowds, so much interaction in the solitude of networked screens; is it any wonder some focus themselves on the latter?
an argument to pure reason is a fallacy as well; because a human doesn’t live in a world of pure reason, not will they ever; and to argue in the realm of pure reason is to argue in a fundamentally inhuman realm.