In a world such as our own, it is sadly inevitable that as our
future becomes increasingly foreordained, the possibilities (and
indeed probabilities) of success seldom invoke in us the sense of
exhilaration that was once shared by so many of our predecessors,
both in terms of the essence of existence and in the manner of
vitality. Additionally, without restraints upon the forthcoming
expansion of the inter-relationship between ourselves and our
theoretical notions of responsibility and respectability, there
is no possible way in which the duration of tenure of our
presence can be upheld.
Nevertheless, it is not only important, but essential, that the
contribution made by the enlightened among us should be
recognised for the overwhelming force that it is, both now and in
the future. The practicalities of the situation are, however that
the above is neither feasible nor desirable. Practically all
practical practicalities practise the practical practices of
practicalitiousnessialisationalism. And but we must say that then
again, on the converse side, this must be sought by the
likes of ourselves, without regard for the obtuse and irrelevant
means of sensationalism.
Therefore we can rationalise the previous argument thus: it is
non-sensical to exercise our abilities whilst we feel unable to
project our consciences in the theoretical manner of aspiration.
A beneficial side-effect of this postulation on imperative
reasoning is identified through the consequence of logical
examination in the manner of Lehman-Ghatzer. Involved in this
substantial process is a comprehension of the preferred tracks of
those ways
in which the individual can extend what is feasible and what
never should be feasible towards the perplexing light at the
unattainable end of the darkening tunnel of unanticipated
delusion.
At this point it is worthwhile pointing out that misconceptions
and incorrect knowledge of the situation with regards to its
referential transparency are, whilst creating erosion of the
directness of thought, also useful in focussing the terminal
wishes of the individuals concerned. It is with this not only
apparent, but fundamental, seeming contradiction that progress
may be made. Progress, not of the regressive sort, but of a type
witnessed in many areas of conceptual disambiguation.
The reasons behind the obverse sides of legality are strongly
connected with the type of practicalities we dissolve herein.
With no undue concern for the aspects of proportionality
democratically resolved through frequent processes of
clarification, it is possible to be inclined towards the majority
views of the average demoraliser. Avoidance is particularly
important in such a circumstance, and every practical step must
be taken to ensure that no inconspicuous route is left unavoided.
The exponents and proposers of these manipulative ways of
exhilaration are to be congratulated in their perseverance, but
not without respect to their lack of consistency in belief and
methods. With persuasion and integrity it will be possible in the
fullness of time to present the ideas and directions of
practicalities without that negativity which has restricted
progress in this field previously.
In conclusion, it can probably be unequivocably stated that there
is a reasonable chance that if there exist a load of cars in a
line, Mr.Cooper's car will be the one round the wrong way.
- David Edgar