Unintentional Tangent, Starve. 0

I write this with the unintentional tangent of thought, which is often recluse and divided from more cognitive or apparent thinking. Unless we dwell within the uninteresting thoughts of citing the more obvious life observances, I'd rather render for you, my audience, a unequivocal misinterpretation of a humorous flatulence. A passing of gas from the brain... otherwise known as a "Brain Fart."

I had a thought about what it is to starve, in thought, emotion, inspiration, passion, and attention. How we comprehend this usually unintended action is to be hungry. Semantically, I would normally bind this with hunger, which would be the proper use. However, metaphorically, for my purpose, I'll use it to describe a more indiscriminate analogy for an idea that we all starve in our humanity.

Paradoxically, to starve, is to have a lack of food or sustenance, and without a source, we would not be able to produce energy. We're inherently selfish beings and, arguably, we start to starve the day we are born. Now herein lies my fart. As we starve for these less tangible ideas of thought, emotion, inspiration, passion, and attention we usually are unaware of the cause or origin of this chaotic void. We seek diligently to sufficiently satisfy our craving for these ideas.

If and when I'm hungry enough, everything is a delicacy and everything is delicious. Let's juxtapose that with our metaphoric starvation. If I am starving of passion, if there is something to be passionate about, do I diligently engage in using that "thing" (which is also an idea) as something to satisfy that hunger? In this argument with myself, to be objective and to both agree and disagree with both sides of my brain. The answer would be "yesno."

The more metaphoric idea of the previous sentences is that, in our minds, if we were to think of our mind as a physical body, it would have many stomachs. To fill one idea, does not necessarily mean we feed two stomachs. If you were to argue, however this is not a conversation from me to you, but from me to myself, that the mind is just one stomach; then why is it that when a certain idea is filled, the mind still craves for those other intangible ideas?

Okay, let's scrap all those ideas. Let's think about starving metaphorically, is like having five empty glasses on a table. Each of these glasses would be a taxonomy for our evolving organisms of ideas. Each glass is the same height and circumference, all glasses hold the same volume of water. If we had a pitcher of water, with a variable amount of fluid, there's always a question of, "will this pitcher be able to fill these five glasses?" To expand on this, what if we had four different juices, each of which was four delicious fruity flavors. Would we try to fill each glass with the same amount of water and juices and have all the fluids mix? This sounds somewhat appealing depending on your choice of beverages, but normally we wouldn't. So for each flavor there is a glass.

Wait... I just lost train of thought.

Point is, God should be the fluid that sustains us.