Black and Pink

A car is a car is a car isn't it. Or is it more than that. Some have argued that the colour, the brand and the model of car, shirt or any thing insofar that is associated to you means alot more than the function that it actually performs.

Hence by any extension, everything would be related to you since we all breath the same air and have the same features isn't it. It is then by pulling a little longer, the narration would always remained the same isn't it. If meaning of colours or any badge for that matter remain singularly faithful to it's original meaning, then we would have the same outcome from time immemorial isn't it. Therefore if a badge is worth more than the weight in gold, than of what function does gold perform other than to give it an exchange value.

But the material interest as such is that we buy and exchange things in value and not in badges, hence a change in badges can only suffice therefore if it generates the same amount of significance which can be exchange for something for the same value. Therefore we would never exchange a golden necklace for a golden T-shirt wouldn't we.

Hence a car or any thing that purports to perform beyond it's reported or expected function serves no other purpose than to signal to other's the meaning of it's audience. But if we were to break it down that communication is a function rather than a haloed need, we would then realise that we would have overpaid beyond what the mere function plus the "communicative value" it generates to it's audience.

Let us take it to the flip side that the meaning is indeed a haloed need, hence insofar to take this position is by extension to condemning yourself to repeating the story of it's original meaning. Therefore let us then assume that black is a symbol of death for everyone- which means that every single person and culture associates black with death- then by extension, we should never be drinking black coffee, T-shirt, pants, cars, watches and other material goods, because we would be in effect cursing ourselves isn't it. But why do we tolerate black moles on our face, hair, eyeballs but we cannot tolerate any other things associated to it.

Therefore to take this particular position is not that it is foolhardy or fatalistic but rather it is extremely difficult to see what is right and what is wrong. Of course, some would call these superstitious and it is really- if we do not believed beyond what we experienced- can be so, but rather taking an opposite direction would mean that we can explain everything and everything is knowable within human knowledge.

Hence it has been time immemorial that there is a tug between busting a myth and leaving to vagaries to something larger or beyond us, hence we would have known the answer at this juncture, we would be God or would have created an utopia on earth- because we would discovered something that sticks, an absolute that would stick which is unquestionably "true". Hence insofar that there are no agreement on the "true-ness" of any absolute, it would always be that symbols and anything performing beyond it's function has a communicative value to the intended audience. It therefore does not have any special significance other than it's intention to relay a meaning to it's cultural readers.

But at the end of the day, like many other things, you believed what you want to believe hence insofar that if one were to take offence at the above message, it is a piece that offers nothing more than an opinion. I leave it to you to believe that wearing a black shirt will save you from a bullet while wearing a pink bullet-proof vest does not.