• Any Deities,
Kant’s • Categorical Imperative
and the Scientific Struggle for A Theory of Everything
… from a Meta-Communicative Perspective.
maybe even every -er) may attempt to explain everything.
All of their efforts are in vain.
Their • fescennines too.
Consider the unfathomably obvious…
Are Human Beings perfect? Are the Tools of human beings perfect? (And if by now you need to define Perfect then a point has just made itself a-Head of it).
Sure, we can –for example –create Cutting Instruments so fine that they can banana-split a Point seven ways from • Sundae but will they be able to cut the next Point After (or to the •Chase) ? And we can create Instruments of Measurement that will track • Dubbya’s IQ but …the mere presence of any Unit of Measurement indicates –if not proves –the immense vanity of that Measurer in his/her attempts to measure Any & All divisions of a subdivision of yet another • New Division.
Thus and since-forth, that grandiose malarkey of a tool (or even a Fool), the Human Language, cannot –in any satisfactory Degree of this Horizon –formulate any Absolute & Ecumenical Laws or Explanations or Dogmas or even • Doubts.
Granted, such a syllogism is self-destructive and totalitarian to the point of inadequacy. But how else could it be that a woman –any woman –retains the right to refute all of the above? Furthermore, every lost soul in this universe –and perhaps the next –may sense it All but only for a moment so fleeting that its (t)races cannot Even then Odds of any Fool’s bet.
Yiiiiiha for all the • Houyhnhnms.
Thank you Mr. • Wittgenstein, you may now entertain your long-distance-runner loneliness as you dance & discuss the Doors with • E. B. White.
Tom Robbins will attaint the Beat.