The profound – we seek it and claim it – though its existence has somewhat been defunct of public noteworthiness at the rate which it is used. I’m talking about repurposing and descriptive definitions, particularly in relation to those almost ethereal moments of insight that ting our existences. Declarations of profound change, or a want to change, seem to tether rather than clear a path to improvement. While we expect the latter after such a bold point of affirmation of thought by external announcement, we may not reap the satisfaction of remaining in our own favor. Much of this we attribute to those invisible mechanisms around us that seemingly alter perceivable reality.
Disclosures of intent have no regimentation, but live by their own principles and degrees of seriousness. The speaker’s words are understood in moments of passion, and perhaps in some cases, on moments of mental clarity and logical basis. Categorical profoundness can fit into the realm of body, mind, and spirit, leaving nothing untouchable. Can the profound be induced if it stems from internally and stamps itself onto the world, feebly or strongly? Or is the profound something far more primitive that we cannot grasp, we cannot locate the source to, but that we trust beyond measure when it seems to be in our favor?
Lest we not muddle quasi-profound outbursts as the impostor to a surge of irrefutable value. Once the intent has been set, we need not see a montage of preparation for the thought to become thing. Nor do we need to remain silent about our efforts, reducing ourselves to a stark before-and-after diptych. Though a statement can self-source cause, purpose, and vitality, it is the consequential occurrences that define it’s emission. Overuse of the declarative renders the source fickle, but a declarative not yet substantiated within a timeframe arbitrarily set forth need not be tossed.