one of my primary partners in crime is also very keen on physical applicability as a proving ground for relevance. i am inclined to agree that concreteness is a valuable testing ground.
the part that's thrilling, though, is when the inexplicable becomes concrete.
which, technically, is always, since naming things doesn't actually explain them.
no subject
the part that's thrilling, though, is when the inexplicable becomes concrete.
which, technically, is always, since naming things doesn't actually explain them.