/lit/ - Literature

Second, we must read with the frame of mind where we are reading in a literate manner; that is: reading for proof and structure (as well so as speaking and listening for it in the spoken word), and learning how to recognize this or the absence of this in whatsoever we desire to write or read or hear or say. It is, to my mind, not a difficult business at all to understand the principles of this in text and in speech and that the two formats are identical in this manner; in that: if one cannot write in it one cannot read in it, if one cannot think in it one cannot listen in it or speak in it. It is noticable, upon coming to this methodology (which is no moreso complicated than the scientific approach of Causes Of Things and Proving Those Causes), that few people today or historically necessarily make good cases for their claims in argument; proofs being absent or impartial, and so without proofs their case falls apart and can be considered at best an exercise in sophistic emotional appeal (i.e. pathos) on their part as opposed to a scientifically structured exercise in the proofs of things (i.e. logos), so that the best writers and speakers are those who have the fullest maximal scope in their thoughts and that the worst writers and speakers are those single-minded types who have trained themselves to only consider one aspect of an otherwise interconnected subject with many related peripherals which comprise the whole of the subject; consider: a doctor, post 1990's european practice, who specializes only in the hand being stymied in diagnosis because the medical condition of the perturbation of the hand has begun for the client in the upper shoulder or the nerves of the body as a whole, the doctor will provide a faulty diagnosis if this is the case as the doctor cannot and will not look at the shoulder and it may be weeks or months before the specialist doctors each refer the client along and meet with the client one by one, taking time to compare their notes (if at all) as they gradually work their way up the arm to locate the screwdriver which is embedded in the shoulder and thereby until locate the cause of the medical condition - a wholly profligate thing more akin to blindfolded divination than to the straight observation of the clear logic of the case and its elements.

We have always considered the “fadism” of a young child to be “normal” in that we recall doing it ourselves and see it all the time amongst younger (and increasingly older) people; swapping out items of apparel and consumption choices to present themselves as one thing one day and then another thing another day, to present outwardly a sense of belonging to one fictitious artificial-image of tribe, in other words, and finding only that the all-along desired ‘tribe’ when encountering other persons who have undergone the same process; all are poseurs, to put it properly. What is this process actually doing to the brain? If we understand the entire purpose of ‘fadism’ rests upon a logical assay and analysis of local environment undertaken by the self to find ‘tribe’ and accord oneself, at least superficially, ‘to’ the strongest tribe then we can understand how the ‘fadism’ subverts the natural human qualities; the entire function of the natural and eons-developed cognitive pathways which makes us Human, but to view the process of artificial images superimposed over or upon reality itself is to realize that the logical mind of a Human is being quite literally torn apart during this process as what it correctly sees and logically discerns will quickly be disassembled and something else takes its place and then another and then another until the full gambit of options on the menu have reached the end of the catalogue and then there is nothing at all forthcoming. I mean here to highlight the unseen damage done to psyche and character and intellectual stability (i mean ‘mental health’) of persons by this process and especially so by the rapidity of it as well as at no point is such a person even actually engaging with real Humans only with persons like themselves who are pretending to be a character type and are projecting character types onto all things around them; that constituting the “artificiality of superimposing images over or upon reality itself,” the alienated or hated person by such groupings is quite literally therefore one who does not ‘conform’ to the pregiven narrative of that grouping which may be the flimsiest of gleaned narratives entirely, regarding ones outward clothing for example. One may easily discern this disposition in many people in the contemporary society; discerning with it the various flaws and points upon which they will be confounded and exploited by others around them who understand, for instance, that adopting their clothing will result in gaining their trust in order to abuse them for some purpose later a that the maximal extent of their ‘true friends’ (i.e. the maximal cohesion possible which can be undertaken by their defacto group unit) will be nothing much (and self-defeating in many ways as gaining skills in things requires non-conformism to a character trope and if a the group will assault a seeming non-conformist in their ranks then they are engaging in self-defeat):

2/6