It is impossible to speak or write without reintroducing a subject (in relation to ideas of abstraction or experience. what is the subject?

) The conscious level of language ..it is useless to try to expunge the influences of language from the account. To weave in and out performativley of the writing itself. This catches the subject in the act of singling itself out from its own composition. The re-emergent outcome of crestic expression like a wave on a pre-individual sea of potentiality. Concern for emergence in its broadest scope. A social construction, not a cosmic one. Cosmic is ridiculous. A reduction to absurdity within the points. It places things in a phil equivalent of an incompleteness. a vanishing point at the heart of each mode of thinking that organises the vistas it can function in. this is where it disappears. In on itself into its own arising with makes a generative connection with itself and you can never go past that point of thinking. Vistas of relation vs non relation. not a debunking but a diagnosis. things are what you feel them to be. A diagnosis of what tendencies might inhabit those regions (thought). Explored vs unexplored (terrain). it is meant as a productive gesture. bringing thought back to its own generative incompleteness. (thought) in motion, the energetics of abstraction. Two lines at a fair distance in visual space so you can t really take them in at the same time. You have to move back and forth between the lines. You do that until you create a fusion effect where you can hold the relative lengths of the lines in a single precept that hasn t happened because you moved back and forth. If you put the lines in the same visual field, activity is the basis of all experience. You are not seeing a stable display/field of vision. The movement has happened implicitly or virtually. Because the fusional field is an accumulation of a past experience that allows you to experience the movement without doing the movement. The present perception as constitutive of that past perception. The virtual fusion of the lines as an instantaneous movement of past action into the present. Anytime we can have a perception of comparison we are placing ourselves in a region of virtual movement as if it were performed. A thought like aspect that comes directly in perception. Not a mediated perception. One line. The same thing. Directly within the perception of the line is a perception of lengthiness, it is not a determinate length between two end points. It cannot be perceived as a line without this length. The thought moves faster than the speed of thought, allowing an understanding or perception of the line because of a recognition of line from past experiences of a line.