(Mis)understandings of Nonideological
Rhetoric
Too often,
contemporary individuals, plus institutions, build
Intolerance from
interactive nonaffinity. Likewise, arrogance.
Fiddles exercising
freedom; choice becomes indeterminate.
When
consubstantiations uniqueness starts entering outliers,
Forced thinking
adjusts to compare disintegrative tête-à-têtes
(That talk fixates
on personal habits and collective behaviors.)
Elitists, to
preserve rank, withhold the utilization of monikers,
Legitimize
unconventional exchanges, encourage such baser
Divisions.
Unbound, unhampered counterpoints provide less
Clarity on
relative virtues of transindividual insights; contrasts
Modestly
illuminate, unify, or recognize how vital ends benefit
Explorations
of self, other, when built of natural
scruples.
Private
comprehensions of the meaning/morality nexus affect
Social systems.
Otherwise, select forms of cultural dissonance,
Sometimes, helps
consciousness-raising cut suffering. Forever,
Crueltys
heightened, set in social-political contexts. Moreover,
Revenge disproves
selves, wipes away victimhood by means of
Destroying
distinctiveness. Mysticism switches me with us.
Thus, the teaching
of diversity persists as subjective pursuits
(Educational provisions dont
necessarily transcend statutory
Issues.)
Disclosure stays object lessons whose intentions injure
Audiences
welfare. Among unenlightened, opinions on hazard
Vary. Forever,
rhetors want freedom to select amid encounters,
To publicly
process all tricks that swivel epistemic progressions.
A Design for
Problems
We cant
uphold that research stays indispensable when keeping communications open.
Vocabulary,
conceptualization, plus methodology, remain our cultures creepy
summits.
By incorporating
modern achievements, new approaches, fresh complexes of exertions,
We might meet
social needs per salubrious interactions. Else, we might skip homework.
Collective nonage
cannot eternally ascertain the essence of, stipulate phenomenological
Analyses of events
besides offering rare critical-transcendental breakdowns of vile acts.
When organized
data are scrutinized, interpreted, or evaluated for their nature, dystopic
Relationships subsequent discourse ought
refrain from hinky unraveling of happenings.
Yet, few
applications of some processes yield deep-rooted data that illuminate suspect
Social
accountability. Hugh swaths of beauty grow nullified when, accordingly,
sluiced.
Regardless,
functional, & focal cues continue to be found in reticulated journal
pooks,
Like champions of
the Glass Bead game at Castalia, those data intimidate some others.
The Trouble
with Fuzzy Distinctions
The fuzzy
distinctions between alleged accountability and actual responsibility,
As mysteries, can
be made manifest, can illume our unfamiliarity with disparate
Ethics. Yet,
were deficient in snapshots of governing bodies basic
vocabulary.
Those covert
representations, fashioned by ascendency, remain highly puzzling.
Our studied
pictures of rulers demonstrate how that needs lack prominence
Their inclusion
never transcends the teleology concomitant to everyday people.
Thus, our theistic
voluntarism, not their high falutin intellectualism, operates far
From unity with
the big guns, fails to reflect our principles, keeps self-interest in
Just elites
purview (obscured distinctions among normative, axiological, aretaic
Cues bring
substantial, clearly distinguishable, principled arguments on
partisans
Assessments of
goods and services.) Traditional responses to societal conditions
Deserve critical
and creative vehicles, not an acquiesce to our puerile
superiors.