By the notion of favoritism, comes next into the equation the repeated understandings of convenience. It is to those deemed as a favorite as also a convenience, all through what is a greed for those in their advantageous dealings. Those who would deal in the prospect of upholding what cannot be maintained without protection, would then find their wealth in decay. It is a decay that stands for something opposite from value, though in the realm of pure function. A function that, for its comprehension, has nothing to do with value. It is a function that compares more to what is valueless, being of something more convenient. Since it is a doctor who would find value in the human life over the medicine, it becomes the latter revealed to be useless without actual value. None can find differences to the definition of value, when through this contrast between use and useless, there is a oneness to it.
Questioning value has its siding among the decay for it. When one takes into consideration a thing for subjective reasoning upon it, there is its deconstruction. A thing then deconstructed, out of question, becomes the desire to perceive it, though in a limited fashion. It has been said that perception is a human limitation, out of its own definition, while it compares to the notion of questioning wholeness or oneness. An attempt to deconstruct value is through question, since to inquire is to dissect or take apart.
While convenience would have its spot among the realm of deconstruction, then it becomes value that shows itself as of necessity. As necessity and convenience are opposites, noting equity as among these descriptions compares what is favorited of certain minorities as becoming most convenient. It is then what is least convenient, being of individualism that cannot pertain to function, that becomes the negligence. Since it is the heart that, for its truth, is neglected until rediscovered, reveals that to the favoritism and equity for minorities, there is deception. A lie is what is spoken of the one believing themselves capable of care, though in their heartlessness, there is the mere desire for gain.
One cannot claim to care, when to their questioning for the definition of value, there is also to their mindset a siding for function. That is, one could not side with both function or a utilitarian or pragmatic mindset and also a willingness to question the meaning of value, without being deceptive. It is the heart, that through its meaning for truth, cannot compare to function. It is function that compares to what has limited durability. It is in what is limited that pertains always to human perception. It is then that what is perceived, always in a limited fashion, of the human to the concept of value, becomes proof for what is never truthful. One could not claim that their own definition to value is their truth to it, when that is the same as deconstructing its own togetherness.
It is those deemed as convenient, also a slave, who could not possess individualism without breaking from the collective mindset or their own group. Believing in the specialty to the group, is same to further the place of one’s function. As function, one is the tool. Though, as an individual, one comprehends that outside of being a slave, the greatest weapon is to possess one’s own mind. The mind, being inherently functional, reveals to work for the human form in all pain that the flesh undertakes. It is an alarm that the form sends to the mind, revealing all what is limited to it. The mind, then, is not limited if outside of what the form can speak to it. Communication from form to mind causes human limitation. Humans are then limited in what cannot be forever in their capacity to undergo, being perhaps the pain that keeps us confined or alerts oneself to an apparent wrong.
In the notion that value can be subjectively interpreted, makes to an automatic fashion its own addict’s mindset. That is, an addict can interpret to then question value, since to their heart, care has been displaced or is missing. Their behavior or action is their truth, while whatever words are spoken carry on as emptiness. Those words, that to their emptiness, resonate from the addict’s disordered heart. In the group that the addicted collectivist has their place, to their value for the heart is offered question. This resonates, to themselves, as the doubt that feeds into addiction that temptation is more of a surety. Though, to believe the addict could truly side with a deceptive mindset, as though to be born from it, is not correct to the slightest. An aspect of addiction is to deceive the self, since such is the place of favoritism. It is in the mind of one believing themselves to be another’s favorite, that there is a deception. If one belongs as a minority to a group, then to believe one is being cared for by those who side with function is finding false value in deception.
While deception is favored to the collectivist mindset, it would be truth that is not favored, though valued, in the individualist’s own. Addicts value others to the same collectivist mentality. Each thing that matches itself to a state, is among function, since that is due to the orientation for a machine forced by its master to be obedient on the speed towards progress. Though, would each part to that same machine come apart, there would be the individualism that possess its own mind. It is repeated here that the slave’s greatest weapon is their mind, making for itself as a value to be freed, not the form.
To an issue that requires its resolution, nothing else can prolong the dilemma more than the continual dependence on function. A dilemma being of deception, and then possessing more repetition for its longevity than what would bring about resolution as individualism depending upon itself. It is in this regard, that equity stands for deception, when to its involvement with function would have no place for freedom nor mutual understanding to all things vulnerable and limited to a human. A human is limited not in their mind, though in their form. It is then that the slave fathoms that limitation, though would be wrong to wish for their form to be freed. It is the form that could not be freed, without first displacing the hindrances to the mind. Such would result in another master to the form, of one that had been there, though was ignored.
Truth or value is ignored or neglected, making its rediscovery a necessity. It is then that neither truth nor value can be questioned, when such would result both to be convenience in the eyes of the inquirer. A respect to the individualistic mindset holds all comparison to what is value, being the heart. It is the mind that to the slave would need freedom, though with understanding that the form becomes a resources, on its own, if under an alien master. Furthermore, such a slave’s own form would be a wasted resource, if negligence to value, being of the heart, is continued.
No comparison to the heart or no contrast from the mind is to the notion for what relates or what does not relate. As in, nothing is at all credible to reveal itself as according to the heart, when occupying itself in the external. As well, all things comparable to the mind are held as a deceit for difference, though cannot be told apart when collected. Deceit plays with the mind of a child, since value to each of them is rendered, in falsehood, through function. In curiosity being the common trait between children means for the heart, in its depiction of value, to be their dependence in the form of parenthood. Though, institutions would attempt to care, through deception, if to gather children into collectives or groupings. It is then that their attempts for care to such gatherings of undeveloped sorts could not fathom value, when such belongs to parenthood.
A child possesses no understanding of individualism, rendering them the same as perhaps the mindset of a narcissist who, through awareness, would look upon the surface to see mere function. It is in this comparison that realization to a child aligning with that of good or evil has a place within upbringing. An upbringing that, for the contrast between function and value, would render a child either still wishing to learn from the surface or to discover something of equality to the value that is beyond the external factors. It can be said of function that to be curious over the simple pragmatic elements to a tool, is to be deceived apart from viewing what has value. Then, to all manner of convenience, there cannot be its truth when curiosity would not display eagerness to rediscover it in its negligence.
Then, to admit that nothing gained for the self, in the way of convenience, can be termed as truth, there is to the negligence for value that such would benefit the mind for its freedom.