There is the idea that honey, for example, has an abstract – or a universal – of sweetness. In that sense, i think it can be argued and indeed practices, the more honey-sweetness the object might have – the more it going towards being honey it is.
As if there is a perfect universal all encompassing honey ideal with its certain sweetness quality.
However, i think this might not need to be the case when considering the abstract. Flap-jack, made with honey, has a sweetness From HoneySweetness. This HoneySweetness – which can perhaps be better said with the actual physical compound btw – is in the Flap-Jack precisely from its universal qualities, that it can be used with other stuff then its initial way of being.
I’d argue that perhaps Sweetness is not an interesting universal to mention as it might not be an independent abstract. It might be enclosed within a human – or earthling mammal experience. Other planets might not have honey, however, if honey was brought to some other planet’s creatures, it might not seem sweet to them at all.. In that case, it might also be argued that However honey is put abstract, it might not be abstract because the category – or the sense – of sweet might not be. They might be interested in the speed stuff fills in a cap.. A speed which might be different, pending on gravitational forces..
One of the elements i think might be interesting in this practice is the share-ability making – again, being a link, an inbetween, the crossing itself – which can be altered as time goes by. For example, one can have HoneySweetness and another HoneyPouringSpeed.These can be, for example, be linked together as a collision, for example: HoneyHoneyPourinSweetnessSpeed, or by someone who might want to to play with the physics, can be described from a molecular level..
In that sense, the abstract is a from element, not a to element. We take the abstract of sweetness, or of the sweet molecules and do some collision linking from them, not attempt to strive towards making something nearer to them. eg the perfect HoneySweetnesss. This abstract doesn’t concern itself with perfection but ability to share, not a universality but a multi-versality – eg the universe of sweetness as well as the one of sweet molecules..
Perhaps its the playing as an abstract that allows it?
Say we have TheSweatOf4pmInJuneSahara that could be LivingHumanFlesh41degrees12%Humidity, yes? The 2ns one is more widely share-able in a sense that 12%,humidity, etc, might be applicable to more elements than the sahara.
No.. Am wrong. CHIGAO!
It can be argued that the 2nd version’s link-ability is more physically versatile, the 41degrees can come as a non-forced linked with many sequences because its likely degrees and temperatures will be used more than deserts, or the specific one.
However, the 1st example might be more poetically versatile.. Lets compare:
HoneySweatSaharaSweetess 4pmInJune with Honey41Degrees12%HumiditySweetness..
Hummm..
I think that’s actually interesting.. I didn’t notice that the fact SaharaSweat and HoneySweetness are of the same kind of language, they actually might combine collide rather than only explode from each other collide..
Should try more elements to learnFrom..
Is there no sense of arbitraritivness in the sahara and honey as a combo-collision? does it matter? (because when it is arbitrary and forced, the probability of sharing might induce a short if search loop being integrated both in terms of time and space.. Like a mutational proposition that wasn’t to be adopted, no?
bootnote:
the irony of dark here is that, ofcourse, am clueless how best to share the search sequences..