instant continual

you are the medium of expression.

reflections from the funhouse

the very specifically worded question: "who is the most familiar human on the planet?"

came about one day after some gathered thoughts and observations needed some attention. point of view, perspective, wonder, question, curiosity, discovery - these things made the above question come together. i did not construct it except in the nurtured alteration of certain familiar or associative words that seemed to want more obsurity than what my knees jerked into place.

the question was "exhaust" and not an elaborate design. however, the question does provide self-reflection, something that i cherish and hope for people. providing a kind of mirror of where the mind is at.for me, the question above came about because of gathered thoughts having reinforced something i cannot help be aware of: that i am the most familiar human on the planet. to whom? to myself of course. it was and is the first thing that comes to mind when the question is asked. each of us have different answers to this question, none of which are incorrect or even necessary. since we are all so varied and separate we each hold our own answers and reality. and as living beings we are continual thus our answers become the steps for new questions.

the question remains relevant to each of us on an individual level.

we each decide what is.

harmonics and gestures

i was thinking about how other words enhance what the main ideas/words identify or represent. not that this is indicator or barometer, but that i notice that those who i find rhythm with (not implying exacting alignments but relative ones) are compelled to enhance in the same intensity as i do. not necessarily the same style or cadence but the same “warmth” “tone” or “temperature” regarding the level of intensity. and i have to say it this way because levels are abstract ideas. constructions we devise to frame segments of reality so they can be viewed for a time by our awareness.

i was also thinking about how my “relationship model” helps me to visualize the relationship of humans and this “awareness” layer i’ve found myself involved more heavily in recently. that perhaps it is not that certain humans (core “medium” of our species versus all subsequent gradated layers to the outer fringe layer(or boundary/existence/influence of our species) have a genetic statement that is ideal for the “awareness” but that they have a genetic statement that enables “phrasing” of sorts or that they have the atomic/chemical/genetic properties that enable a enhanced connection with intuition. or in other words these people, on some chemical or atomic level, are able to utilize intuition more easily/effectively. intuition meaning not only the gathering of experience-entire, that we receive in time, but the capability

this theory does better when testing what i have gathered. that there are gradated levels, that all humans have what evolution’s genetic “current” includes by default. that there are abnormalities/exceptions, to varying degrees, that change this default. that for the most part the default holds true to the medium of our species. this medium is the body that sustains our existence. a relatively “stable” vehicle that allows for the trials and tribulations of existence and survival.
so in each category we can devise there is a microcosmic presence to potentially nth degrees. the more humans in each category, the more testable the presence of these “categories within categories” or microcosm. so within the grouping of people, i or any human finds rhythm with, there may be a high variability of type present in that group. not to insult the understanding that diversity is an element of our nature. indicated by the state of our continued existence, survival, evolution. diversity is a relative and constant attribute of living creatures in our known observable space.

but this goes to explain or identify or make aware the state of variable prevalent even in those areas of human intellectual structures (laws, traditions, practices, etc.). that is that even when we think nothing is changing or is diverse, it is; and not necessarily in latent form, but perhaps not so recognizable to the indicators used in associations, labels, and conventions of the “human stable”(medium, vehicle, or main body)