a b and c? problem or?

if a is b and b is c then a is c

if a is b then a is not c

when a is c and a is not c then c is not c

———-

problem or problematising?

the c b and a thing seems to me like a logical lingo that am perhaps attempting to map onto imagination, or an imagination language..
While being similar, the aesthetics of imagination are very different somehow, i think.. the difference being the linking make up.. where as the a b c language’s sensation is sort of hermetic, there is a sense of closure, of being contained, the imagination’s sense of containment is not that of the hermetic kind.. it is of a link, a searching sense/trajectory rather than a closed one..

——–

perhaps:

How if Ax6boom?
When A *might* be all words beginning with A
— i replaced is with might—-

——–

is that a link?

———

perhaps:

How if 2xAhumm?
When 2 is might be precapitalistic schizoid?

—>>> i think the 2 perhaps links have 2 very different spahs.. not sure they could link.. hummm the 2nd has too many meanings.. more linguistically poetic..

—–

perhaps i should use objects that are links rather than numbers..?

which are the links?

and/or/with
++++++

etc..?

how?

seems restrictive without a need?

DIMENSIONALITY??