May 28, 2018

Ramblings of a maniac—

To be clear, I’m a non-monogamous sapiosexual which boils down to defining what type of subjects I like to fuck. A heterosexual likes to fuck subjects who are orthogonal to them physically, meaning they are restricted in subspace of Euclidean space that represents human sexuality. Homosexuals are similarly restricted. A pansexual says they neither care about orthogonal nor complementary subspaces but that presupposes sexuality is a continuum or something more analytic. While the sexualities may be possibly be infinite, they are definitely countable – that continuum hypothesis is null. So a sapiosexual’s subject of fuck choice is minds and I’m a great mindfuck.

Want to discuss the representation of a compact Riemannian manifold by a Lie Group?

How about the moral implications of Nietzsche’s intelligence with respect to his inherent Narcissism which lead to the propulsion and expulsion of the same God he proclaimed would no longer exist. The irony of everything Nietzsche stood for was that he himself was a mistake. Nowhere have I seen accurate translations of his voice or thoughts and I don’t even speak his native language. People who speak English can hardly translate the English versions of his semantics properly so imagine the level of fucked up that happened when he was translated from German?

What about the implications of Alexander Grothendieck’s stance against academic mathematics, the fact he didn’t want to publish to Springer and was morally against everything academics dick-suck him for?

These mindfucks aren’t bound in time, either. I’ve been in an on-and-off again relationship with Bertrand Russell for the last 7 years.

Yeah, philosophy is a subject sapiosexuals fuck a lot. You want a proper mindfuck? Sit it on a course in combinatorial logic or type theory. Mathematics is the ultimate mindfuck which is why mathematicians and philosophers tend towards aestheticism. They’re jacking off to what they consider to be the inherent beauty in mathematics and abstract thought. Even the fact that we think at all was enough of an emancipation proclamation.

Naturally, the non-monogamy stems from the fact that studying the universe necessarily requires it. Einstein was in a relationship with his violin as much as he was space-time, married his cousin and I believe was in a secret relationship with Minkowski, because both of them made up dumb shit about R4 and space-time that seems to only be replicable if one of them was jerking off the other. And Leonardo Da Vinci was like the biggest pimp of all.

So, no, you’re not going to fit every criteria on this list unless – at this point – you’re some sort of form of Artificial Intelligence… or very close to it.

Leave a Reply