philosophical as weaponry

does philosophy really have a longstanding history?

is being philosophical ever a current state of mind?

is rational constructionism that basis of philosophy?

are dictums the endpoint of this perspective?

are timelines, as the serving means, necessary?

is conjecture ever initially contemplative to start with?

what if philosophy had yearning as an initial attribute?

what if philosophical-questing was not to get answers?

what if philosophy was an attempted embrace

beyond what mind could conjure,

as far-sightedness is just attempting a trickle-down 

to come to linger in words,

as if to feed a groundedness based on a languaging context?

if laments were homing pigeons of a mindful sort,

would that eventually bring back answers 

from emotional flights that had soulfully lingered, 

beyond where think can straight-forwardly go?

has grounded mindfulness lost its way,

when it comes to philosophical envisioning?

what made language the medium of philosophical context?

couldn't philosophy by more a choir robust and in sync?

for where they are not in the search for answers,

but are the broadcast of potentially a deeper birth.

one of groundedness beyond what meaning can provide.

what if a collective dancing together 

is philosophy expressed with syncopation and glee?

what if disaster is the questioning that releases the teasers,

that ignite the expression of philosophy,

not as a quotable but as the medium of existence,

in the doing of more than the register of just saying?

what if mindfulness is just philosophical tacky?

a form of prideful reductionism leading to complacency?

and philosophy is not gender neutral in its pronouncement.

in its manliness, it registers as mentally ordained.

what woman would want to get suckered into that speak,

when it can be rendered as the pursuit of naming everything?

rational constructionism seeks to curb and restrain. 

emotions want to create and embrace as identity served.

philosophy expects a rigidity as a normative,

where name calling has a respectable place of honor,

either by agreement or disagreement, so stated.

diatribes, as hooligans of thought, can be philosophical. 

formalism itself, can fashion as philosophical.

proper mind is so self invested in it to save its ass.

but philosophical is a form of species elitism dignified.

not that there can't be an honesty to it all,

but it comes with a side on naiveté duly present.

it's when mind-smug-dom is acceptable, 

as a sincere and honest effort 

from within the thought confinement as one's environment.

I'd like to be philosophical,

but not in mind-kept way.

I don't want philosophical as a residence either.

it has to be a living and a breathing,

as well as a mystical and an ethereal,

and not captured by mind as hostage or slave.

I don't want philosophical to be reductionistic.

I don't want minions of language, 

to be expounded in a capture.

right now philosophy is supposedly cage worthy,

but there is no captured animation to a philosophy.

we trivialize to conjure,

yet philosophy has livingness at its core,

that words can not fully describe.

our livingness speaks of itself.

comprehension is in another world, 

fascinated with its sense of composure.

at this point

I would rather bleed out, 

then attempt to say.

I would rather flatline,

staring into yours eyes,

as a gesture of conveyance, 

that we both can deeply relate to,

as ongoing . . .