Aristotle Leaning(s)


This aristotelean categorization is truly divisive baloney.

It’s a sandwich constructed of questionable and, perhaps even, insubstantial substances.

I predict herein a melioristic convergence of all things categorical,

the concretization of all things and ideas


(much like baloney.

Consider the bicycle, for instance, since it is a gadget. Does this gadgetriness then prove that the bicycle more properly represents a subcategory of the category otherwise known as gadget?

Please help I.


forever puzzled. Rhetorically, then, examine this itemized collection of verbal units as a simple demand though it unclearly isn’t.

These words do not actualize something demanding despite opaque phrasal shapings.

Enough is often more than



2 Responses to “Aristotle Leaning(s)”

  1. 1 shadmarsh

    good point(s). the bicycle itself is made up of a near endless category of word objects that dissolve or coalesce depending upon where into the landscape they enter, and upon which object they are placed next to: for instance, I always try to imagine the Pope riding a bicycle.

  2. 2 Stephen

    Wallop me in the noggin with sprocket indeed. My master link prefers to prevaricate whenever the Pope straddles a bicycle. That then, I suspect, precisely embodies divine intervention.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: