Thinking and sense-giving and sense-perception

No, you do not accept a radical multiplicity in being. For you there is only one being that thinks. You do not locate thinking in any other being.

At what boundary do you determine when thinking should have been in just one being, a hominid?

And how did this thinking have to express itself? And what did this thinking have to lead to, what was the striving of this thinking?

And why do you determine that you cannot and do not want to perceive thinking in other living beings ‘as thinking’?

Why do you not want to accept the thinking of others as thinking? What is it about their thinking that you think isn’t thinking?

If a squirrel collects nuts, and buries kernels in the process, because she is also trying to spread the seed of the tree, you don’t want to see this as such an think: “No, animals don’t think anything really – they just don’t think.”

How do you know since when on which living being does not think or does think: do you think thinking must always find a certain expression, always lead into certain directions and to certain results? Why can you simply not accept thinking that is different, beyond ‘your thinking about thinking’ in your intellects world?

Among humans, you accept diversity probably only out of your fundamental existential “conformity-thinking” that you tie to your genetics.

Beyond that there is nothing. You think that everything that is thinking in self-advancement, must first have a human and humanoid form and development.

You have appropriated the concept of “thinking” in a sad, all-suppressing and horrific way, and you are using it to impose your “sense”, your sense of meaning, in those places where you think.

Thinking > sense-making and sense-perception.

Schreibe einen Kommentar

Deine E-Mail-Adresse wird nicht veröffentlicht. Erforderliche Felder sind mit * markiert