inquiry

But the velocity of words have gotten to a point where “time and accident” reenter in ways unforeseen by Jefferson or his contemporaries. “Time and accident” now amounts to writing so much that what you are searching for is lost in the tonnage you've amassed on the web. All of the polygraphic tendencies in the world cannot help when we fall under the weight of our own words. It only makes it worse – just another straw on the camel's back.

People choke on the chaff of their own cognition as it is, so of course there's going to be cognitive body count in, on, and around the altar to the integral of minds from one to <number of participants>.

It makes me wonder if the approach to proliferation has to be reconsidered. Do we need to scale back? Focus on a smaller oeuvre that we develop over time? Maybe a post that consistently grows into a longer essay?

“We”?

In case you haven't noticed, there's no place where the phrase “shit happens” comes more into its own than online.

So there will be no agreement, no consistency, no all for one and one for all, etc., etc., because that requires an animal we're not.

Now.. it could be accomplished for subsets of participants that, um, “have a brain in their head”, but good luck establishing such in times where anything short of letting everyone shit all over each other leads to screams of “privilege”....

Or do we need to throw caution to the wind and write, focusing on developing ideas that branch out and proliferate to others who take it and run wild? Do we need a url on an idea for it to inform our worldview?

Again, there's no “we”. Hell, it's a miracle the ego typing this even knows how to spell a word so utterly foreign to its nature....

IN CONCLUSION: It turns out that what was possible before The Eternal September isn't after.