a sense of ethic is self-positional.
law is rendered,
as a mindset existence.
the spirit of the law
was to transcend that,
to feel for the grounding
beyond display,
that which can be memorized,
does not apply.
knowing and being
have different start-ups.
we seem enhanced by knowing,
that either disguises
or overwhelms our being.
feel is subsequently placed
in a cognitive home.
the logic of the mind
appears to be well dressed,
while feel is always nude,
inside those clothes.
surely, we have
a basic species ethic alive
but not intended to be integrative
with global concerns.
we, as a species,
have a self-intimacy
that denies that.
our sense of ethic is
in the vain of self as concern.
we invented fear as a means
of observation's interpretation.
it is a mind sense of that,
that is definitional in the first sense.
we make understanding,
a sense of rightness used.
we have a comfort-zone criteria
as practical use.
we make life
as an audience-director involvement.
experience becomes the movie,
taken to heart.
this is how separatism is
a conner stone
of our wellness condoned.
ethic is observational cause-worthiness.
it's application should have been
from the spirit forthcoming into play,
not ordained by bystander
or consensual approval.
we all hurt by false premises,
as machiavellian proposed,
as if a moral code
is implied or imposed.
there is nothing fluid
in the life of judgment.
and ethic is not a show of hands,
that are judgment authored.
it is as if we all agreed
to do a broadway show
about 'wrong'
and tried to separate the actors
from the audience.
and any paying customer is
not in a position of creating value
as a privileged perspective.
the ethic of be
cannot be regulated
by the ethic of know.
know should come from
be's accessibility's domain.
so where did we loose
the expanse of focus needed?
what is when
the self got to be pre-occupational?
the heart-brain has an ethic.
it's where we are one
ethic to start with.
then moving within
and where upon . . .
No comments:
Post a Comment