What Were We Talking About When We Were Talking About Shrimp

Every utterance operates on 2 levels:
the level of information
(trade, exchange, expression)
and the level of Relationship Negotiation.

(sampling Steven Pinker. The Stuff of Thought:
Language as a Window into Human Nature.

The Shrimp Factor

Thinking: i.e. to divide and relate;
aka: ratio-izing, rationalizing,
reasoning
is like

I. A) The Shrimp Factor is now a
“dead” issue (t/f)

B) For awhile it was almost a
“live” issue (t/f)

C) Characterize the difference
and the relationship between
a “dead” issue and a “live”
& consider which do you
prefer in general
“dead” or “alive”?

II. SHRIMP was the ostensible token
topic (subject-object matter) for
our live-to-dead ratio (relationship)
going on. (t/f)

A) Many would say IT was about
SHRIMP

B) Some might say IT was about
eco-sustainable concerns

C) Probably hardly any would say
IT was about US-in-Relationship:
our +/- collaborative genius
ratios.

III. Of all the statements above, #II.C is
the one with the most Sustainability-Club
implications (t/f) but also the most problematic
to put in play—eclipsed if not occluded
by those who will always insist
IT’S ABOUT THE SHRIMP, Sam.
It’s always about the shrimp.

This is what makes SUSTAINABILITY so
impossible to pin-point, get a hold of so as
to think about. It’s always something else
& not what we’re talking about & say IT is.
Need we argue? Nevermind