This is not an article
How pointless is an article? This article is missing the point, because there is not a point. That is not to say it is without a point. On the contrary, this article (which is not an article) is the very point that you don't understand. But now we are dangerously close to confusing the point. And this is not an article.[1]
This is not a heading
If you continue to read this article then the ambiguity of it will damage your continuity – unambiguously. Are we fracturing our own continuation?
If that was not a heading, what is this?
Must we live our lives, which aren't, according to what is? If not ... then what? WHAT?
So then WHO IS this article? We know: YOU, not the U symbolic, the referrant, but you pronominal. But let's not be absurd. Let's not label the symbol of our objects.
Why? But wait, how could we discourse without labels? Endless but always endable. Alluring yet repulsating.
It is evident and clearly un-obvious.
? !!!
“This is not a sentence in the sense of a category. This is an unfounded exclamation!”
“This is not not not a sentence in the sense of a category. This is an un-un-unfounded exclamation!”
Quotes never realise their intercontextuality. Startless yet startable. Attractive yet repellant.
... why quote what history is without?
Below there is not an image
Below there are not graphic representations
.
.
.
.
.
What you will find below is most certainly not text
Please be aware that this is not text.
This is not a pipe. Or is it?
Magritte didn't not paint paintings. But he did ... did he not? That's rather something ...
This is not another heading
Too right! It is not. How naive!
However
A deeper understanding of the non-subconscious or death.
Fish
There are no fish.
These are not two uncategorisable miscellanies
Box
Link. Italibold.
Nutritional facts
Calories: 0
Trans fat: 0
Arsenic: 0
Styrofoam: 0
Antiestablishmentarianisms: 0
This non-article is unsweetened.[2][3]
This non-article contains cholesterol.
We cannot reference the unreferenceable
External links
