” ‘Mind’ is something like a ‘manifold’ in terms of its mathematical senses, transposed into the domain of awareness, sensing, and so on. The methods we learn as children, methods involving language and the denotation of identity into representations, comprise a technology. The first technology. The problem is that each ‘version’ of this is ‘purposed’, and acquiring ‘one’ occludes the purposive potentials of ‘the cloud, before a specific one dominated’. The actual implications of what I am speaking about here are, to me, more provocative than all of science and religion. We are doing something that is »more than both, in order to produce deadly representations that dominate the process. It is relatively simple to return someone to ‘the cloud’, and this is almost all of what addiction and compulsion are actually seeking. A moment of freedom from the domination-thing »as their mind.

But my point is simple. There is a way of collapsing the manifold that results in our common language acts. But there is another way that »drags some of their precursors into the artifact that results from the collapse so that the eye of the mind sees these in precedence to the »schema of common language acts. This is (one form) of intellectual insight, and results in things such as aphorisms, humor, fierce invective, and other aspects of what we might think of as rhetorical intelligence.

Most of us have nearly no formal rhetorical intelligence, and our ‘folk versions’ are largely self-misforming. This makes us ‘want to be exposed to’ examples of ‘sudden liberation’ that (actual) insight or humor provide. Originally, humor’s primary power was understood as an »insight way. A way of seeing ‘beyond’ ordinary confines. For us, however, as a ‘culture of helpless spectators’ and ‘culture sluts’, most of us will be situated as spectators. In any intelligent culture, it is unlikely we would ever ‘watch a single person on stage’ because what was happening in and amongst us would be shockingly more profound than anything we could ‘spectate’. But I digress.”

— an anonymous informant