Why do answers end with answers
while questions seem to begin with yet more questions?

As a case in point…

How are the Case Studies of economic and political history
different than Einstein’s Thought Experiments?

Wait a minute…

Yes, well that’s not really a difference, I think.
Thought Experiments and Case Study expositions
both begin with waiting a minute to notice cause-effect narrative,
to decompose relationships between systemically dynamic parts.
Imagining in reverse time,
from now as cause
back toward effects
leading up to this current cause,
this current noticing,
this sometimes chaotic and unsettling waiting a minute
to notice what I am struggling with.

Why does this Case of dynamic thought exposition
feel like my important,
yet complex,
systemically dense and intricate,
hopefully even richly resonant,
question to ask,
within all the vast universe of questions
I could be investing in right now with you,
instead?

That’s more or less, probably more,
what I was trying to point out
before you interrupted me.
Isn’t our dialogical rule
also our Golden Rule?
We see richer, more fertile and optimal, outcomes,
responses to our internal Thought Experiment questions,
including our familial Dysfunctional Case Studies,
and our ecopolitical Conserve v Progress Democratic Health and Safety Case Studies,
when we begin by asking how our appositionals are somehow the same.

OK, fine.
And sorry for cutting in
when I meant to be cutting with.

Sometimes you are so fundamentalist,
so Either the Same Or Different.
By now, dearest ConservativeRight,
I would have more patiently hoped
When I ask how things are different
I really both mean to look at how they are the same and different.
So, how are Healthy Thought Experiments and Fertile Case Studies
the same?

I think we just agreed they both begin with noticing nutritional elements
and decomposing reverse effect back through potentially complex causal networks
of cooperative opportunity.

Yes, but Einstein’s Thought Experiments were metaphysical,
mathematics and unnatural science,
while Case Studies are more like watching Physical SpaceTime Reality Shows,
and Economic and Political Disaster LoseLose Devolutionary Games.

How did I know that you would respond to your own question,
about how ecological thought systems are the same,
with how they are different?

Sorry, honey,
seems to be an inductive RightBrain neglect of mine.
But, do you agree or disagree,
or both, somehow,
that Einstein’s Experiments were about metaphysical spacetime operations
while Historical Case Study Operas
are about saying and singing and dancing
actual physical and natural,
maybe even spiritual..
Wait, no, that would be over in the Metaphysics Department.

Yeah, probably better to stick to the natural realities of Earth
spawning ecological systems and cooperative thought networks.

Another difference
Einstein hoped his Thought Experiments would lead to True,
and therefore not also False,
Either/Or mathematical statements about time and energy
and the speed of light’s travel
across and through evolving and revolving appositional space.

But, when you write your Dysfunctional Extended Family Case Studies,
you couldn’t realistically hope your appositional Elite/NonElite narrative
would lead to regeneratively True,
and therefore not degeneratively False,
ecological systemic statements
about LeftEgo’s Dominating sense of time
as both positive and unfortunately too often negative-degenerating energy
and (0)-sum speed of BiLateral EnLightenment travel
across and through evolving
and revolving
regenerative health and safety space stories.

Really! Whyever not?

Because that would be confusing a LeftBrain Either-Or metaphysical thought experiment
with its appositional
NotThisEgoForm-NotThatEcoSystemic temporal-neural cooperative-nurturingflow function,
Both/And RightBrain (0)-Source
WinWin
Integral-ReGenerativity Embryonic DNA/RNA-Hypothesis.

If you say so,
but it all sounds LeftElite complex
and merely RightNonElite chaotic,
(0)-sum equivalent pay,
but still Business As CaseStudy DysFunctional WinLose,
to me.

Sorry love.
Don’t shut me down.
Just doing my LeftBrain Either/Or job.
Either Win deductive truth
Or Lose inductive notnot appositional-integrity flow.

Why is it that your EgoWin perspective
always gets the shorter definition,
while you stumble all over my WinWin NotNot way
to come up with some longer way of noticing
my nutritionally elegant nurturing Elder-ecological
health and safety lovely bilateral ways?

It’s the convex spatial Yang in EgoMe.
But, you know how I’m only at my EgoRegenerative best
when totally immersed in your BothAnd WinWin
bilaterally concave
YinYin lovely Feeling Experience
acting out ecosystemic TruthFunctional Case Studies
for BiCameral PolyPathic Love Stories.

Well, when you put it that way
you come across as less of a WinLose dominating ass,
degenerative hack writer of LeftBrain survival of the fittest;
more regenerative BothAnd RightBrain balancing thrival
of our +100%Space = (-,-) Empty-Zero fit-in-ingest integrity.

Maybe Einstein’s LeftBrain dominant
EitherSpace or Time Experiments
are metaphysically different
yet RightBrain ecologically WinWin ReGenerative/DeGenerative (0)-Soul
ecosystemic-appositional,
bilateral nondual co-arising resonant.

You’re doing it again.
That thing where you are LeftBrain explicating
while I remain RightBrain bilaterally inductive feeling-integral implicated
to somehow not really quite deductively exist
outside of timeless now.

Well, you just did the same thing.

That’s only because you have a monopoly on reductive temporal language development.

Sorry, babe,
but what else can I bicamerally do?
You smell and taste and feel just as nutritious and nurturing.

And sometimes pathological and toxic
thanks to your LeftBrain domination of ecopolitical history,
your infrequen health-nurturing matriarchal cooperative creation stories
are too often drowned out by your distorted YangEgo Space struggles against,
rather than with,
my YinYin WinWin sense of ecosystemic well-being timed Feeling Experience.

Are you feeling nutritional integrity progressive-suppressed again?

I am prevolutionarily near-diastatic,
just as you ConservativeElitist hope not.

How about if I deductively meet you half way?
Both oppositionally different
and appositionally evolving toward integrative
inductive
co-relational confluence narratives?

Now that could produce some Tipping point
conserveRight-progressLeft climate ecstatic fireworks!

You’re just teasing me, aren’t you?
This has all just been foreplay for inductive you,
to get me all WinWin bicamerally polypathic hot.
I feel so used.

Don’t pretend your co-investment in our regenerative health
and progressing future through EarthTribe babies
doesn’t like it.

Could you talk a little dirtier,
and leave out the kids part?

You mean Earthier,
deductive-inductive nurturing co-relational climaxes of nutrition,
followed not by post-revolutionary Elite/NonElite bickering,
but thriving future regenerations of optimally fertile healthywealth.

Is this a bicameral Thought Experiment we’re having
or a bilateral Case Study about regenerative appositionals
of convex EgoSpace
with concave bilateral EarthTime dialogical syntax?

Yes, baby,
bilaterally different later
if noticing our WinWin bicameral possibilities now.

Ummm.
That sounds like you’re ready
to stop noticing
and start our healthy orthopraxis?

Baby, you’re the Thought Experiment writer;
I’ve always been your LoveCase Study
of and for and through and by
SpaceTime’s co-arising nonduality.