if one thing can be something else, why do we settle on it as one thing?

I am fairly certain that any person who decides that one thing is what a thing is, and is inflexible in that arrangement is a weapon sent to do battle with me, taking away my right to freedom, not that freedom is an ideal or an ideal is worth battling for,
but if I want to experience something - and I know that while I experience it, I am also experiencing something else, and if I want to call the one experience something else, and others are there to say no, the thing was the experience, then I think there is an ideal at stake. Perhaps this is what is meant by communication, and it being so hard, and what is at the heart of confrontations, etc. Cuz all you people want to recognize something, and not feel left out,

Later: The heart of contradiction and the pure goodness of inconvience, i.e., there is only one way to reaching something good and that is through massive inconvenience and to not embrace that is to be the person who insists on a thing being what it was as the one experience and not capable of also being what was also there while you experienced it. This being the definition of an asshole, and thus the major work of the present day. It comes in many forms.  ¶ 12:53 AM