My Thesis

Reads: 284  | Likes: 0  | Shelves: 0  | Comments: 1

More Details
Status: Finished  |  Genre: Riddles  |  House: Booksie Classic
The thought process of an overthinker

Submitted: June 16, 2012

A A A | A A A

Submitted: June 16, 2012



My mind is actively my escape, my prison, my dream, my nightmare. It is the harbinger of my downfall, and yet it is the cornerstone of my rise. My mind is full. An ever changing labyrinth. It is my lullaby, it is my insomnia. Music is its catalyst. Music is its tamer, its container, but also its liberator, and its evangelist. My life is a controversy, with one path that chooses both paths. A life that takes the middle path, while still siding with one side, while never choosing. YIN and YANG. TIGER AND DRAGON. Constant conflict, constant balance, constant. My darkest thoughts are my greatest escapes, my greatest escapes are my brightest thoughts. I cant choose, I cant make up my mind, but in doing so, I have chosen, I have made my decision. Left, right, middle, up, down forward. Its not about being right, its about being wrong so that someone can be right, so that way everyone is right, and no one is left, and you can be in the middle. Its about getting your point across and being understood. To be understood is relative to time: past, present, future. You cant always be stuck in the middle of two conflicts, sometimes you have to side with all three sides to make a triangle, the perfect structure. The perfect structure is part of a cycle of life, making a circle, a constant. In every life there are turns, we always try and be right, we all actively make squares as we are actively made up of two perfect structures that can only be made through wrong right turns. So is there even such thing as a middle? The displacement is the shortest direction between two points of a triangle and it connects both the right and left sides. As you turn the triangle, it again becomes a circle, and the cycle begins again. Is there only contrarianism, is there no yes. no. or only a yes. No there is a . But its hard to see, its in balance. There are no opposites just differences. Or are there no differences just opposites. This is just non sense that makes non-sense or is it that the true aspect of life is a state of non sense, a state of escape, emptiness. But is white the absence of light or the combination of all light. If so, is there no such thing of emptiness or fullness or is it all relative to perception, conception, and inspection. Its determined that cool is not real it’s the absence of heat, but heat is real, it can be measured, but if cool is relative, then it must be real, because I say so. Cogito ergo sum. If I think, ergo/there for I am, if I see it, it must be there, or is it. But this isnt a declaration, this is a thought, so if a though is abstract then it cant be concrete, it cant be. But abstract is the contrary of concrete, and you cant have one without the other so it has to be. What's real what's fake. What's different, what's the same, if everyone is different doesn’t that make everyone the same, or is everyone the same and we perceive them as different. Am I the replacement because I am different, or am I replaced because I am the same but different. Are we all circles, triangles, or squares; are we either past, present, or future? But cant we not be one, for without the others, there is no one. If there never existed the others, then neither will there be the brothers. So can there be one, or can there be many or can there be no-one. Can there only be one or no one because one is made of none and none is made of no one but both are made of many. Constitutions. Does that mean there are many ones, and no-ones, and single ones.

Non-sense is a state of pure sense. A state of nothing and everything one in the same. With no middle there are no contraries, with no contraries there is no middle. Without 1 there are no 3 with out 3 there is no 1, there is noone. Without 2 there are no 1 and 3, without 1 and 3 there cant be a 2, of us. The perfect structure is of 3, the constant structure is of 1, and the middle structure is of 2. the middle can only be made of one. And the last can only be made from the manipulation of the first. The dividing line of a triangle separates it into two even triangles, the displacement connects two opposite points. So which is the middle? Between any two points there is a middle, and between the middle and a middle is an interior and in the interior is a focus.

There fore there are three perfect structures, one is made of three, one is made of none, and one is made of two. One can create two, two can create one, but only one can change into three. And only three can change into one. So is three the perfect number? Or is it one, or maybe two, or maybe one two three. Maybe. The epitome of centralism. The epitome of contrarianism. One point branching in two separate ways, creating three points. Or is it two points coming together two make one new point. There are many sides to every story. One has three, one has none, one has four. Now an introduction of a new cast member. Is a character really new, or is it just a different perception, conception, interpretation, or manipulation of the second.

People desire things that are different, things that are separate from the norm. But how true is this? In reality, what people really desire is what is normal. So in retrospect, what is different is normal and what is normal is different. Let me explain: If you talk to someone and they seem like the "typical average person", that strikes you as a 'weird' person because they are just too 'normal'. Now if you talk to a person who just has that one little different thing about them, they are no longer weird, they are regular.

The social interactions of people are based off of the opposite of the 'status quo'. As long as there is a majority, there is a minority, and vice versa. Now whether people choose to be in the majority or the minority seems to be less influenced by their morals and more influenced by what or who they want to be. People make these decisions subconsciously. For example; a person may want to be part of the majority because, they love being a part of something bigger than them, or they hate being the little guy, or maybe because they like defending something that everyone else believes in; the same thing can be said if the person wanted to be apart of the minority, he or she probably has the desire to fight for something they truly believe in, or the thrill of having the odds stacked against them, etc.

There will always be an unstoppable force meeting an immovable object. "So are there always two sides to a story?" No there's always the third, the truth. There is always a middle between everything. "Ok, so then the third one is right, right?" Wrong. Just like 1, 2, and 3; or the triangle, square, and circle. There is no one answer, but they aren't all correct. Its like a resonance structure in chemistry. There is no way to empirically show a resonance structure, you just have to know that many different structures make up this one structure, but at the same time none of them alone are the correct answer.

"So, I think I understand, so what you are saying is that everything is one whole but at the same time separate components, and social interactions are based upon this because people choose one side or another based on which of the three sides they want to be. And once they choose, the cycle of everything being one and one being everything continues." Correct, but still wrong. This is because, if I am correct in my thesis, then so must any other thesis that goes contrary to my belief, thus making my thesis realistically wrong but empirically correct. So I am both right and wrong, because if I am right then consequently I have to be wrong to complete the cycle.

So to sum things up, there is no definitive way to define human interaction ….

© Copyright 2017 carg paradox. All rights reserved.

Add Your Comments: