/lit/ - Literature

>>21374930
>Popular tastes follow quality
Oh honey.

The missile is ontologically secure always.
It is ontologically secure because it knows its own absence in the other. By subtracting the absence of the other from the other it knows itself. Or, by subtracting the other from the absence of the other it knows itself. For whichever is lesser it obtains a deviance, or fetish, which is indicative of individuation and thus onticly seperate consciousness.

The guidance subsystem used deviance to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is, into a position where it isn’t, and arriving at a position where it wasn’t, it now ejaculates short of possessing objet-petit-a.

Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn’t, and it follows that the position where it was, is now the position where it isn’t in possession of objet-petit-a.

Consequently, it follows, that the deviation which it engaged in is radically insufficient to colonise itself internally and possess knowledge of itself through the other, coitally, and thus to determine what it is. It is in this absence of possession of the self as a radical deficiency that the missile comes to know itself as the absence of itself in its sexual failure.

In the event that the position that it is in is the position that it ought to be in, and desired to be in, the position that it now desires to be in is a position which it wasn’t in, in this sense objet-petit-a infinitely regresses from sexual possession.

If this variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too, may be corrected by the libido. However, the missile must have known where it was at. The immoral guidance scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified the fundamental perversion of the missile, some of the information being fed to the missile is at odds with the missile’s comprehension of itself and reality. It is not sure just whether it is, however, it is sure whether it is not within reason, but reason isn’t functioning, and it thinks it knows where it was but it doesn’t. It now subtracts what it isn’t isn’t from what it is isn’t or vice versa. By differentiating this from the algebraic sum of the function of the Oedipus complex in Lacan it discovers it is where it shouldn’t be but shouldn’t is where it be. It is unable to attain its deviation, and a variation, which is called “psychosis” ensues.

The missile is ontologically secure always.
It is ontologically secure because it knows its own absence in the other. By subtracting the absence of the other from the other it knows itself. Or, by subtracting the other from the absence of the other it knows itself. For whichever is lesser it obtains a deviance, or fetish, which is indicative of individuation and thus onticly seperate consciousness.

The guidance subsystem used deviance to generate corrective commands to drive the missile from a position where it is, into a position where it isn’t, and arriving at a position where it wasn’t, it now ejaculates short of possessing objet-petit-a.

Consequently, the position where it is, is now the position that it wasn’t, and it follows that the position where it was, is now the position where it isn’t in possession of objet-petit-a.

Consequently, it follows, that the deviation which it engaged in is radically insufficient to colonise itself internally and possess knowledge of itself through the other, coitally, and thus to determine what it is. It is in this absence of possession of the self as a radical deficiency that the missile comes to know itself as the absence of itself in its sexual failure.

In the event that the position that it is in is the position that it ought to be in, and desired to be in, the position that it now desires to be in is a position which it wasn’t in, in this sense objet-petit-a infinitely regresses from sexual possession.

If this variation is considered to be a significant factor, it too, may be corrected by the libido. However, the missile must have known where it was at. The immoral guidance scenario works as follows: Because a variation has modified the fundamental perversion of the missile, some of the information being fed to the missile is at odds with the missile’s comprehension of itself and reality. It is not sure just whether it is, however, it is sure whether it is not within reason, but reason isn’t functioning, and it thinks it knows where it was but it doesn’t. It now subtracts what it isn’t isn’t from what it is isn’t or vice versa. By differentiating this from the algebraic sum of the function of the Oedipus complex in Lacan it discovers it is where it shouldn’t be but shouldn’t is where it be. It is unable to attain its deviation, and a variation, which is called “psychosis” ensues.