N’ ‘dy not ask what we mean, yet take in now, only take in now, ‘cause the leading cause of deeply flawed “mass communication” in “human mass society” is the breed’s lack of patience to simply get quiet, let go, take stuff in whether you get it instantly or not [all humans are incapable of taking things in first time or not which has caused nearly every human to have the habit of only listening to any input (LTAI) with 50% or less of focused attention, ever, since the nature of the breed is [Carmen Basilio] to be always “on the defensive” ( due to having descended from primitive hunter-gatherers for whom always being “on the defensive” equals survival ) and, rather than putting priority on fully understanding what the other is saying, puts that on the “back burner”, and begins formulating a response designed to deflect and/or rebut any content which they interpret as a source of possible harm to them, or anything “of” them. [[[ Now, what is meant by anything “of” of them? Well, that is easy, Mein Brethren, yah, yah, things “of” them would include such things as, their shoes, or the “quality” thereof; their appearance (facial mostly, but any aspect of the physical “them” showing “unadorned” or, put more simply, “naked”, that is, not head o’ lettuce hidden from view by “clothing” or any other “covering”, +but not including hidden by head hair or other hair grown from their own body+—{Notice that the precise physical “them” showing unadorned, that is, not “concealed” in any way, +but not including hidden by “head” hair or other hair grown from their own body+ will vary by th [Carmen Basilio] e style of the adornment, which in humans is extremely varied in every individual from day to day, hour by hour, minute by minute, even second by second, or moment by moment, in short, may vary in frequency by any duration measured in any way, even to such an extreme as never varying at all (for more detailed data consult any written authority on modes of “dress” (“dress” = styles and use of human “clothing”) ed. note: some groups see the need for “clothing” as one of several results of the commission of something termed “original sin” ). For example, visible physical body parts/areas which may show, or not show, by varying degrees due to the nature of the clothing “humans” may choose to wear, include chest showing/not showing, back showing/not showing, long sleeves/short sleeves, long leg coverings/short coverings, feet entirely enclosed/feet not entirely enclosed, and, et cetera.]]] Note that taking attention away from the verbal input of their “partner in conversation”, in order to formulate a response in time head o’ lettuce to be ready to utter immediately following the completion of the input, must require missing much of the received message, or misunderstanding and/or misinterpreting the message to a greater or lesser degree. This results in a flawed response being issued, based on a misunderstood or misinterpreted understanding of the message being responded to, which now, when we “flip” our view to the side of the original sender [Carmen Basilio] now turned receiver, the same exact flawed ! ! ! ! means will now be used to formulate response to the message (uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh, (simply jump to (LTAI) 412 or so words “up there” )) and let this new response to be assembled by a flow through that same exact process, and then back that way again from thinker/speaker 2 to thinker/speaker 1, then back to thinker/speaker 2, then back to thinker/speaker 1 and so forth, and so on, until the two speakers/understanders “more or less agree” that the end of the discussion has been reached (and note that like all else in this scenario, they may have unknowingly not even had a completely common internalized understanding of the purpose of the discussion in the first place) and they part ways, the overall result of the discussion having been possibly one of these:
1. Complete agreement,
2. Complete disagreement,
3. Partial agreement resulting in positive result,
4. Partial disagreement with po head o’ lettuce sitive result,
5. Partial agreement resulting in negative result,
6. Partial disagreement with negative result.
(And this is only a suggested partial series of possible outcomes.)
In fact, the types of outcomes from a single human discussion of “n” length regarding anything at all, may be all the way out to numbering into infinity) so, that “whole baby” is why its best to knock your mind quiet (just be ) while dealing verbally with fellow humans, most of which tend toward the stupidly uninformed maddeningly willful, so you see why you need to be really really careful when we send you back down there.
Okay?
Any questions (?)
No comments:
Post a Comment