In a world such as our own, it is sadly inevitable that as our future becomes increasingly foreordained, the possibilities (and indeed probabilities) of success seldom invoke in us the sense of exhilaration that was once shared by so many of our predecessors, both in terms of the essence of existence and in the manner of vitality. Additionally, without restraints upon the forthcoming expansion of the inter-relationship between ourselves and our theoretical notions of responsibility and respectability, there is no possible way in which the duration of tenure of our presence can be upheld.
Nevertheless, it is not only important, but essential, that the contribution made by the enlightened among us should be recognised for the overwhelming force that it is, both now and in the future. The practicalities of the situation are, however that the above is neither feasible nor desirable. Practically all practical practicalities practise the practical practices of practicalitiousnessialisationalism. And but we must say that then again, on the converse side, this must be sought by the
likes of ourselves, without regard for the obtuse and irrelevant means of sensationalism.
Therefore we can rationalise the previous argument thus: it is non-sensical to exercise our abilities whilst we feel unable to project our consciences in the theoretical manner of aspiration. A beneficial side-effect of this postulation on imperative reasoning is identified through the consequence of logical examination in the manner of Lehman-Ghatzer. Involved in this substantial process is a comprehension of the preferred tracks of those ways
in which the individual can extend what is feasible and what never should be feasible towards the perplexing light at the unattainable end of the darkening tunnel of unanticipated delusion.
At this point it is worthwhile pointing out that misconceptions and incorrect knowledge of the situation with regards to its referential transparency are, whilst creating erosion of the directness of thought, also useful in focussing the terminal wishes of the individuals concerned. It is with this not only apparent, but fundamental, seeming contradiction that progress may be made. Progress, not of the regressive sort, but of a type witnessed in many areas of conceptual disambiguation.
The reasons behind the obverse sides of legality are strongly connected with the type of practicalities we dissolve herein. With no undue concern for the aspects of proportionality democratically resolved through frequent processes of clarification, it is possible to be inclined towards the majority views of the average demoraliser. Avoidance is particularly important in such a circumstance, and every practical step must be taken to ensure that no inconspicuous route is left unavoided.
The exponents and proposers of these manipulative ways of exhilaration are to be congratulated in their perseverance, but not without respect to their lack of consistency in belief and methods. With persuasion and integrity it will be possible in the fullness of time to present the ideas and directions of practicalities without that negativity which has restricted progress in this field previously.
In conclusion, it can probably be unequivocably stated that there is a reasonable chance that if there exist a load of cars in a line, Mr.Cooper's car will be the one round the wrong way.
- David Edgar