the unanswerable what or what 'what'?

Why can’t we resign from this world. It is programmatically persistent with delivering an exhaustion that seem to affect everything about being a human.

Will to power and life and supremacy does not cut it no matter what words you grease it with into books and films and hyper pattern collecting - replicating arsine intelligent systems.

I mean what is the life expectancy of words. If you can have a dramatic epiphany as you try to ponder that; you can then ask yourself if at any given moment - is everything true or is nothing true at all.

God forbid I go back and read some of what i have written.

Because if i am to know that i am a 1000 generations different from the life and processed understandings in my words now compared to something as much as I wrote yesterday, why would i ever use communication to share my thoughts ever again. It is the clearest example of inefficiency and an indicator of a shattering reality -

We reduce our experiences into concepts that can be articulated with language. Every pure experience is violated with utter unawareness into miniscule, lackadaisical, basal, hardly mathematical figurines. We stopped drawing it which was by itself injustice except in the hands of incredible artists. We started wording these figurines and now think about how incredible polluted all what we perceive is. Oooh am I subscribing to Hegelianism? That needs me to trust language and use of it as valid which I don’t. So without subjective experience and without the absolutely distinctively different expressions and descriptions of what everything is, how do we know everything is real or it exists or what real means or what existing means or what anything is.

Negation never worked in philosophy no matter who the philosopher was because well why not start with negating oneself first? ah because if negate ourselves who will write and speak what we should or how can it matter. Negate negation. Let’s just be monkeys and animals again.

Wittgenstein suggested although not in the words or inference I am about to prescribe that language is a highly unreliable and incompetent system to get to the core or finality or truth - whatever you want to call it.

I am suggesting further. The need to put sentience into linguistic instrument is both the cause and effect. The need for language is strange, why did one being want to speak to another being about the sunset he sees. He could have looked up on his own or if he was looking at the sand or plant, why not let him do that. Why share?

Share not in the essence of altruism because that does not need language. Share as in show and invite a response. Is that tendency a product of linguistics or vice versa?

This is another what came first thought piece. Let’s say the will to pleasure came naturally and first. That will is so powerful it does not allow itself to be called as hedonism, thanks to the language triggers that word carries. The will to pleasure in each self can be the cause that became a need for language.

Preservation and self conservation is loosely the will to pleasure if I should comply to my inherent tendency to share and hopelessly seek a reciprocation that shall being any semblance of pleasure which I would like to once not deny. I mean if truth was forever delicious the same way, we would have just fed ourselves grass and fruits and meat and never changed..

Nothing seem more capable of complete annihilation and apocalypse than human language becoming a individualistically subjective form of expression. Communication is vehemently abused.

Hmm. Irony.

But what even does these combination of words do other than cater to the most familiar pattern recognition and computing in the programmed brain.

It’s late night here. Do i say good negate or good night?