Broken Promises & Disturbed Sleep

He wanted to announce that falling out of sleep at 3.30 AM was not waking up. That the broken promise of sleep still had a redemptive possibility. Waking up was reserved for 6 AM, when staring into the unforgiving empty day did not have the promise of a hiding place. 

Blending

Define it, he'd say. He tried. But that's merely solitude with an extended frame of reference, he'd point out.

Then it actually struck him. Down. The definition did. In solitude, the feedback of one's own definition still reiterates oneself. The absence of that last loop is what makes it isolation. 

Darkness is at least amorphous, he thought.

Aging emptiness

She wasn't the type to be moved by the depth of his torment. He was embarrassed. That had stopped moving anybody, let alone her. He wanted to ask her why. He did not.

Elsewhere she said, of course it's not Utopian if the goal of your life is to have your children grow up and claim to have been raised by a depressive.

Office

What do you mean you want a wider group?

Just to make sure we aren't too dependent on you.

And the wider group will help in that because?

Don't be antagonistic.

Okay, let me rephrase. Why do you assume inference approaches work better for power equations and not for the actual inference engine that's being built? 

What?

You just defeated your own argument.

Wish it on no one

Coming from anyone else, this would have sounded pretentious. Not Walser,

I would wish it on no one to be me.

Only I am capable of bearing myself.

To know so much, to have seen so much, and

To say nothing, just about nothing.

The day after

A desire to be tortured is not worth the effort in being that.

Relearning this is otherwise known as the human condition.

Consider the Ant

Philosophy classes usually teach the ethics of suicide as some sort of a cost benefit analysis, don't they? Or, they argue that the rationality of imposing death rests on the returns longer term life not outweighing the short term pain. The crucial aspect being that the point at which such a consideration is made is as critical. That is, if one were to consider a person X who had pain Y at time t1, it does not matter what the pain becomes at time t2. What matters is the judgment of the benefits of a life well lived at a later point as compared to the pain Y at the time t1. This has all sorts of inherent issues given the judgment at time t1 is by very definition under a 'cloud'. But that is not the point of whatever this is. Most Philosophy departments will deal that question in their introductory courses. 

What isn't clear is if Y weren't pain but insult. Not pain inflicted by insult but the epistemic insult of life itself. I wish to propose, there is a number unto which the external stimuli do outweigh the insult. Only time t1 here is the age of the person.