What an excellent and enjoyable comment to read—thank you for it! Your comment perfectly summed up an irony and paradox that a lot of my work orbits: ‘To put an ‘is’ to life is to objectify it, but necessarily so. For without the ‘is,’ there is no life.’ Perfectly put! Learning how to maintain that difficult balance is huge, which brings to mind the dialectical thinking of Hegel, which I think we can best understand as jazz improvisation.

‘[T]he ‘dynamic’ has no ‘is’ […] ‘Is,’ in effect, stops time. A thing that is, is that thing always, ‘across’ time, until it is not.’ – Excellent, excellent, excellent! I also appreciate your incorporation of experience, and I completely agree that the thinking in this piece has implications for phenomenology, which is hopefully captured in the book.

‘Your mother’s last pen communicates ‘its’ existence to you, not via ‘itself,’ but via the entire improvisational context of ‘you’ at that moment (and every moment) that ‘it’ ‘exists’ for you. / The urge to play your D is the urge, via the entire improvisational context of ‘you’ at that moment, to communicate that D.’ – That’s such an amazing description. Perfect, perfect! Also my friend, are you the author behind “Life, the Universe, God, and all that Stuff: 'an inside-out view?’” I believe I just found you on Twitter and Amazon! I’ll follow and give your book a read!