The Incidental Corridor on Uninterrupted Thoughts, No.653

In one form or another, all objects are relatable as we see them without interruption and perceive them as they exist at the very moment of perception. That tree is related to that house; that flower to that bush; that path to the side of the road, and so on. Our observation is successive as long as we not interfere with it in any way. As long as we stay unmoved and unaltered. A bird may come out of the sky and land on a branch of that tree. We continue to consider the tree the same tree as before, even though it now has a creature clinging to one of its limbs. This succession, this immovable and imperceptible continuity is our way of operating with the world, and is also what leads us into the thought of “self” which, by its uninterrupted-ness with nature, is a relatable but distinct addition to our surroundings.
If our perceptions divert from one observation to another, we immediately perceive the changes and are able to distinguish the differences from what existed before. As it is with our thoughts. If we were reading and suddenly our mind drifts to another subject apart from what our eyes are following on the page, there arises a discernible change in the words in front of us. They no longer convey the same message as before. They’ve broken off from our perception which is now lost somewhere in our imagination. When our mind goes back to the page, we immediately notice that what we just read did not reach the same thought pattern as before and must be now read over to recapture the words. It’s the same with all objects. Once a perception is interrupted, even the slightest change can be observed if we imagine on what we’d noticed before. Should our perception be unmoved, should we stay within the same repose with the same viewpoint, even a branch falling from the tree would still not propel us into the thought that the tree is not the same as before. It is still as it was, but with one less limb. It is possible that if our focus changed and we turn back to the object, we may not notice the slightest difference and grant it to be the same. But the mere interruption of the succession of our thoughts is enough to alter the imagination into reflecting that there is something definitely altered in the object and at first we are unmoved by the difference, but soon, upon closer observation, notice that the object we’d been concerned with is absolutely not what we perceived before.
Our relation to all things, to matter in general, depends on our perception of what is around us. We notice change if our perceptions change. If we remain in total and absolute focus on an object, any alteration of that object in no way forces us to comprehend the difference from what it was before. Its appearance remains the same. An appearance changes when perceptions change. If I lay this pen down on the table and walk away, when I return to it I cannot recall if it remained in the same place or if it rolled somewhat. My mind cannot convince itself of either perception. The succession of our thoughts, uninterrupted, will always grant us a seemingly unalterable presence. It is the nature of all things to be relatable to us in some fashion. It is the diversity and distinctiveness which follows from thoughts interrupted, which perception operates on to present us with a succession of events. This sequence allows for the spontaneity of the immediacy of the moment, and the differences that emerge from each instance perpendicular to our perceptions, and outside of us so we can be convinced that we are not what we see, but apart from what we see as the “self.”

On the Essence of Association, No.652

Association consists of the primary qualities of objects which are solidity and extension. Within these qualities are the presence of figure, motion, and cohesion. All objects, to be an object, must be associated with something other than itself. And the sense of this something cannot exist independently without a particular quality. Motion could not be detected unless it were measured against another object. Figures must have extension and penetrate beyond themselves into a something. The idea of cohesion comes to us through reason as we tie together the variation of qualities into a formidable and comprehensible subject of our senses.
The secondary qualities, associated with all objects, are color, taste, figure, texture, etc., which could not exist independently but must be associated with a something. The same is true for primary qualities. They have a single or mixture of secondary qualities that impress upon the senses, exhibiting particular forms which, through custom, we recognize, name, find, define, and so on.
As objects change, their figure and motions change. They become associated not with their original qualities or properties, but “decay” into something altogether different from their beginning. The force of motion effects everything in which our senses are aware and associates these properties as belonging together. A flower will eventually wither; a tree will penetrate into more space; water thrown on a fire will douse its flames, etc.
We comprehend reality, and existence, by this essence of association, this sense of extension and motion between objects which impress upon us their being and their effect on nature. We could not recognize an extended object without it being associated with something else; nor, for instance, could the sense of sweetness be experienced unless something was possessed with that particular taste.
The essence of association is what produces the contradiction of all things, which is its most basic quality, and its inner being, without which nothing would have solidity or extension. Any object must have a secondary, associative, quality that would make it relatable. Without a distinct property clinging to every object, reality would be impossible to comprehend.

The Incidental Corridor of Common and Contradictory Experience, No.650

We are certain of existences through our perceptions, and what we perceive is considered continually existing even in our absence. It is the foundation of our reasoning that, even upon interruption, perception holds the objects of its concern to be part of its own existence, and permanent, whether it is internally reflected on or externally perceived. What goes beyond the common experience of perception is, however, the contradiction of a continually existing object in that we may view something, a house for instance, and turn away from it before looking back and claim, without doubt, it is the same house. To our consciousness it seems so, but it has genuinely taken on a new appearance. It could not be the same house since our perception of it was interrupted and all objects cannot stay static in time. They must, in their existing state, move with time as time moves and, in that respect, take upon new space as the world has moved and the horizon has changed. Moreover, if we imagine the world as continually existing, these changes must take place. We can’t perceive the changes since our perception, although interrupted, can only claim to see the same object since we believe in a continuity outside of us, and all objects, in our absence, sustain their matter and are never subject to our own creation but are only subject to our subjective thoughts and perceptions.
We tend to a belief in the cause and effect of our perceptions and it is only that reasoning which gives us common experiences and situations, or objects, relatable to each other. We understand that day does not cause night, but if one were to toss a stone into a pond the effect would be not only a common experience but one which, beforehand, can already be predicted. Even though the object, the pond, is believed to be continually existing, we can also disrupt its reality by tossing an object into it. Now that it has changed due to the act of our changing the surface, its existence is altered and our perceptions are altered with it. If we imagine the outcome of a stone dropped into the pond, our imagination would envision the effect, but it could not duplicate it in the external world; it can only create a semblance of the effect. If the world exists only in our imagination, it comes to question whether the pond is one which is perpetually changed by this or that object landing on its surface, or whether it exists as a stolid, barely changing, object of perception.
The contradictions to common experience arise when changes take place that are unimaginable; changes which are confounded and claim different results than are expected. Within these contradictions, cause and effect still operates the same, although they may differ in size and definition. Yet, once the experience unfolds, reason applies itself to the perception and turns the outcome into what would be considered common due to the forces that drove the matter in the first place. It is only the madmen and the distempered who are unable to tie together interrupted perceptions which, with a vivacity and force, always return to an imagined continuity while undergoing imperceptible, but determinable, changes.

The Incidental Corridor of Continued Existence, No.649

When we think of the continued existence of an object it is in the terms of the constancy of the impression that is bound to it. In contrast to a perishing existence which may consist of taste, odor, temperature, the constant condition of an object underlies its coherence, as in a land mass, or an ocean, or something as simple as a door. If I am seated at my desk, I see a sheet of paper as a temporary impression which is now blank but soon to be filled in with words, marks, or anything I wish to cover it with. Its existence is constant as long as it is left as is. If my office door opens, the same door which is constant in my memory, which has the same worn look, the identifying shade of a fading color, a contradiction occurs in the form of a new phenomenon. The body which crosses through the door may be someone I’m expecting, or someone who is surprising me with a visit. I experience a totally new, unreflecting reflective impression, a spontaneous occurrence which creates an impulsive situation, one which motivates an act; to smile, frown, rise to greet my visitor, or stay seated with my hand held out as a welcoming gesture. This new experience immediately operates in erasing other impressions of constancy, as in the windows, bookshelves, or any object that I perceived when alone. The question remains about the ongoing existence of these objects, although I no longer perceive them as I had before. Moreover, my mind no longer senses as it has turned its focus toward my visitor. The only constant I’m aware of at that moment, is the open door which I can still see in the background and the wall of the hallway behind it. But, these impressions soon fade, as I exchange greetings with my visitor and lose sight, literally and figuratively, of everything else which had been the only sensed objects of my surroundings. They have perished, along with my impressions, into my memory, resurrected at some other time at the right moment, the moment when I’m again alone in my office and all things, all objects, return to their earlier setting. They once existed and reappeared as continuing to exist, but, as my chair has moved slightly, exist in a way I hadn’t experienced before since the angle of my perception has changed, also the light of day passing through the windows. What is perceived as constant, is now sensed as having been altered. Therefore, nothing continues to exist except what is sensed and what impressions are created the moment of perceiving.

The Incidental Corridor No.658

It is a perceived resemblance which allows consciousness the idea of a continued existence. Former sensations offer a remembrance of objects and appearances which, even when interrupted, are identifiable and seemingly remain unchanged. We could be in a room with objects such as a lamp, desk, or chairs, close and reopen our eyes and they would still be in place, unmoved and perfectly the same as before. Time has passed and they have undergone a definite change, but it is imperceptible. It is not that our perceptions
contain an independent existence, but it’s the mind which has a propensity to assume certain fictions which offer the continuity in which we see the world around us and, more so, allow us to experience the cause and effect that underlies reason.
We assume a continued existence by the continuation of appearances which fill our memory and “find” each other through relative images. We know that night follows day, and a stone dropped into a pond will create a disturbance on its surface, or an apple seed has the propensity to produce an apple tree and eventually an apple. This continuity and constancy is what reason relies on to explain its existence as an ongoing, uninterrupted journey through time. Our sensible perceptions, though limited to our own experiences, vivify an existence that connects with the impressions of images within our own thoughts, and are independent in the sense that they are individually possessed, but connected with a sequence of impressions that fill our memory with the belief of a continuation of body and the persistent, but false notion of an independent existence.

Interrupted Perception, No.657

One way of viewing or understanding a continued existence outside ourselves, is through broken or interrupted perceptions. Although we can’t truly sense why things exist, we are still able to, or believe to, perceive objects as contiguous, as constant in their appearance and implying that they have being whether observed or not. As in a mountain range, we perceive its shape, height, and other identifiable characteristics, then should we go off in another direction, or turn away and come back to the same place where we first observed the object, we sense that nothing in it has changed, although it has. Our first impression of it has dissolved, replaced by a new impression. We are insensible to the changing impressions, yet the time that existed between them has changed. At this point we find ourselves in a contradiction between the passage of time and the object’s identity. The reasoning we use to connect the two is that of a continual existence. Therefore, that mountain range would exist should I never again perceive it. Its constancy, its force, is outside my existence and lies somewhere as an identifiable-in-itself, free from my imagination and a truth of reality.
This is the well disguised reasoning that treats all objects as either continuing to exist regardless of perception and those which, within an interrupted impression, find themselves an object of perception, but eventually through time and our sense of its movement, relinquish their grip on the imagination and dissolve into nonexistence. Perception separates an ongoing cycle of life from the mere illusions which at one moment are real and the next fiction. It is the interrupted perceptions revealing an independent reality which will always exist outside our experience.

The Incidental Corridor No.656

The alternating characteristics of external objects contain a constancy and regularity which, when applied to the senses, support a structure which complies with our perceptions and understanding. There are, however, certain impressions which are temporary and rely solely on the imagination for their furtherance, as in taste, odor, color, etc. These impressions perish from the senses and are only resurrected by experiencing them over again. They are temporary qualities represented as images and not as objects. They are, in fact, internal impressions interchangeable between subjects and existing only long enough to be experienced through sensation before suddenly dashing off into an imaginary dimension.
Certain objects, in their continued existence as external impressions, contain characteristics which are constant and remain always as being. For example a fire burning in a fireplace. If one builds the flames to a comfortable level, leaves the premises and returns an hour later, the fire would have still retained its characteristics as in providing heat, particular colors of the flames, the scent of burning wood, etc. The only change which takes place is the intensity of the heat and flames. The fire is still fire. It is constant and remains an entity with scant differences of its characteristics. It exists distinctly as a product of a real external world. On the other hand, secondary qualities, as in taste, smell, color, are temporary and have no existence beyond the internal impressions of the one experiencing them. Once an apple is tasted, that particular sensation or characteristic eventually vanishes. It cannot linger in space as a real object. Its existence (taste, texture) perishes, never to return as what it once was. It is only the imagination which could recreate the sensation, although it cannot exactly, but only do so through reflection, and a subjectively questionable reflection, at that.
The alternating characteristics of external objects remain as sensations vanishing into permanent refuge in the imagination even if never again reflected upon. It’s those characteristics which are constant, as in a mountain range, or a wide expanse of a flourishing meadow, which stress an existence that, through perception, are permanent and belong to a reality where the sensibilities immerse themselves in the perceivable world.

The Incidental Corridor of Necessity, No.655

Necessity exists in all operations. It’s powers of con-joining, of custom and conjunction, is its essence. We perceive certain connections and relations of objects; of their frailty, scent, colors, texture, etc. which occur together. One necessitates the other. A glass can transform into jagged pieces; a particular flower would always produce the same scent; an orange would be accompanied by the color orange. There exists, always, a potential transition and a sudden change, but a change that’s determined, that’s been woven into the mind by impressions. There is an inherent rhyme to necessity which infers a balance between imagination and reality. Its foundation is its cause. Also its effect. We come to expect particular reactions from one immediacy to another. If we couldn’t, nothing would be immediate. Life itself would be drawn out, crawling into the future in slow motion. The spontaneity that exists can do so only in the mind that comprehends connections from moment to moment. A consciousness which accumulates knowledge, but eventually falls into a range of simple causes and determinations that lie beyond the imagination, but still are present and playing a hand in the sphere of connectivity. And, since all experiences directly result from the mind which perceives them, so are the causes and effects which control existence. Objects, in themselves, do not cause changes in other objects, or to themselves. Those powers don’t exist in the objects. They are impressions on the mind. The mind that winds them tight on a spool; leaving no remnants to reality, but mere appearances which are never truly there. If they were, they’d be lifeless, as a statue is lifeless. No, they are the past, the dumping ground where the crows land to pick apart the pieces of dreams and thoughts.
Repetition is the mark of necessity. It holds time to keeping time, and space to stay as space. There is no real power in repetition. It is only the end, not the means. That power is unknown. As is the force of a nature which determines all life and all things unknown to us. We can only reason with the results, which, by understanding, can nearly successfully predict a relatable outcome of the operation of a nature that is perfectly created. It performs its customary transitions and is both alive and inert; Its existence holds for us a cause which has already been determined and in which we are fluidly vaporized. While the particular end of the mind of impressions draws near, and what mode of existence created by these impressions have unfolded, whether benign or criminal, whether saluted as a victor, a parent, a successful societal agent, they would always only be appearances and wither away in silence. It is only life which once gone could not repeat itself, nor could it attempt to form a different life outside itself, thus, we look toward reproduction which is our method of preservation and our subordination to existence; our only real cause as it is determined to perpetuate time, whether present or in imagining the future.

The Incidental Corridor of Deception, No.654

What could be further from the truth than “truth” itself? Do we not enter the world as free, independent, and pure of thought and spirit, untouched by humanity and open to the world? Do we not eventually leave this place as dependent, as tied to certain stereotypes and idiosyncrasies, ruled by culture, by demands, by the makeshift ideologies that strive to teach a surrendering?
We can only will what we will, and seek what we seek. There are no closed doors or open roads. There is only one road on which to travel. We are that road, that intention. We make it so. There are numerous counterattacks, reciprocity in urgency, vengeance, depravity of values and consistent praise for the calculating warriors who stand before us and proclaim their madness for truth; who lie and deceive while thinking they are the only path to prosperity, both spiritually and materially. They consider themselves harbingers of the most righteous path, the indelible servants to their unquestioned maxims looming like the clouds above and the approaching storm that is readying to wash away the grime that accumulates on us all.
What is more fearful other than learning your beliefs can’t hold water, or, mostly are sieves draining all faith in the truth and leaving behind the sludge of falsehood; the grime of faultiness; the thickened mass of ignorance which no longer slides but becomes hardened like clay and is eventually baked solid by the transforming rays of light that expose its listless qualities, its stolid composite of swamp-like ooze, sticking, clinging, and suffocating life?
We are led like sheep, cloned like vegetation, transformed like bits of particles formed into indifference; lifeless and robotic, christened as doves, yet caged like pigeons; to obey, to follow, to agree at every turn and surrender all faith into the crudest form of pedantry held by those who would do the greatest harm; who disguise themselves as the promoters of righteousness while, in fact, are the real byzantine warriors they so fervently protest.
To be deceived at every turn is the conditioned condition we so fiercely embrace.

The Incidental Corridor No.653

Ideas are the result of impressions channeled into the mind and formed by experience. Their cause is necessitated by reflection and, ultimately, subsists through reasoning derived from these very same experiences. They cannot be the cause of themselves, nor do they form spontaneously without any requisite beginning. Their true principles are based on precedent and arrive in the same way as cause and effect. It is through previous perceptions, through the conscious and unconscious grasp of the external world that ideas place themselves within the imagination and could never be just “imagined.” Their dependence and energy is an invisible modality of force, one in which captures a sequence of thought and aligns it with a disposition not intuitively preformed or innate, but substantially reliant on a pre-condition of an absolute setting where the divergence of perceptions fall together. This “arrival” of an idea, thus, is the product of itself through the force and efficacy of a nature which is unknown to us, but provides the formal medium for the dissemination of thought and reflection.
Ideas, essentially, cannot power themselves; they cannot be reproduced nor can they follow a particular mode of creation. They rely on the past and, more so, on the immediacy of consciousness; on the spontaneous outburst of a vibrant reflection powered by reason and propelled into the open, where knowledge creeps from the edge of the unknown into the vast arena of incipient thoughts and ideas.