#found abstraction

[anna-scribbles]

need chat to start exploring the limits of the miraculous chat noir power. like he tries to destroy ladybug’s period cramps with his mind

[corviiids]

what if mlp au light doesn't get his cutie mark until after he's killed pony L and then his cutie mark becomes L's symbol to symbolise what L's defeat means to his fate and identity and everyone's like wow pony light your fate is to become the second L and succeed L to continue his legacy :) and pony light (pony) is like yes >:) (evil pony expression) (on his pony face) (because it's a my little pony au)

[america-oreosandkitkats]

there be some Takes out there fellas

[3am6od]

[daveamisdpda]

Found abstract art…

This is me seeing what can be found in the way of abstract / semi-abstract images just by looking closely as I walk around:)

Location: Keynsham Lock, Gloucestershire | Shot: 26.03.25

[citrusinicake]

awag

log from here but edited a bit

[killyridols]

memories captured in rooms by xochi solis, 2023, gouache, acrylic, spray paint, colored pencil, dura-lar film, digitally printed epson paper, vintage wrapping paper, hand-marbled paper, colored paper, & found images on paper, 44 × 30 inches

[sciderman]

The way Kravens Last Hunt wrote Peter makes me convinced Peter has anxiety, like...the way he described his feelings, physicaly and mentaly, was too relatable not to believe that

i mean if you had a muscle-bound hunter out to skin you alive, you'd have anxiety too

spider-sense is kind of like in-built anxiety – and the unfortunate fact is, it's founded on the promise that something bad is, 100% guaranteed to happen.

seconds before disaster

[wackywatchdotcom]

imo jax has no clue that hes miserable. like hes putting on a face for sure but i dont think he actually has the emotional awareness to know WHY hes doing that. he just wants to look cool and masculine and thats as far as he thinks on it. theres more to it but he doesnt know that. being sad isnt cool so he wouldnt even entertain the idea that hes secretly sad

[lesbianwyllravengard]

I am obsessed with, nay devastated by, this look of pure fondness and wonder, an almost smile, on Leon's face as he watches Luis when Luis isn't looking.

And then as soon as Luis turns back around, Leon is scowling again. He is falling in love against his will and he haaaaateeesss it

[annabelle--cane]

with the training of a decade of formal language education I now have a strong enough grasp of spanish to read french and feel like I've been awake for three days and am having a stroke

[gen-is-gone]

This is perhaps bitchy and uncharitable and certainly almost a year late to really be complaining about but fuck it, we complain anyway.

Yes, I am still unreasonably upset about Sutekh clinging to the side of the TARDIS since The Pyramids of Mars, and upset because I was sort of foolishly hoping we might get some actual characterization fallout from that addressed properly this series, which of course isn't going to happen. And the reason I'm upset about it while it seems fairly few people care all that much is because it's a litmus test for the degree to which any given person sees the TARDIS as a character in her own right. And it's fairly obvious now that rtd doesn't, or at least, only does when it suits him.

Because the thing is, if the TARDIS is a character, is a person, then the manner in which Sutekh uses and usurps her, and the ambiguity in whether it was consensual ('seduction' vs 'coercion') becomes extremely important to the Doctor and the TARDIS's relationship, and the TARDIS's characterization as a whole, both going forward and echoing back. Like bearing in mind that what actually happened is so ambiguous, what Sutekh being 'there the whole time' even fucking means, that trying to pull a point out of it is almost an exercise in futility from the jump, but to borrow some wildly inadequate or perhaps even inappropriate language, it's the difference between whether the TARDIS has been cheating on the Doctor for more than half the length of their entire relationship, or whether she'd been being (sorry) raped that whole time and the Doctor just hadn't noticed.

And yeah, evidently it was too much for me to hope that there would ever be any kind of real emotional or plot-relevant followup about that, because, again, that requires you to see the TARDIS as a character whose choices and emotions and relationships matter beyond their immediate relevance to the plot. And this isn't new by any goddamn means. This isn't actually the usual split between the traditionalist and the avant-garde camps. The TARDIS's sapience and autonomy do not begin with The Doctor's Wife; this is established (more or less) in The Edge of Destruction, the third ever serial in the history of the show, all the way back in nineteen sixty-fucking-four.

And y'know, yes, it would still be a big deal if Sutekh jumped on in Wild Blue Yonder (as would make way more logical sense) rather than Pyramids; the ambiguity of consent that the show either doesn't care or lacks the stomach to address would still be a blow, but it wouldn't have the unutilized capacity to fundamentally alter the relationship between the two longest-running characters in the franchise if it was the span of a season, rather than thousands of years in-universe and nearly five decades in real life. And not to be conspiratorial or assume categorical bad faith on rtd's part, but yeah, it's hard not see that particular unnecessary detail as a petty response to Moffat and Chibnall's own continuity-and-paradigm-altering retcons, and an attempt to get his own shot in.

And it's just. Never gonna get talked about, huh. 'Cause it doesn't actually matter, right? 'Cause it's not like the TARDIS is really a person, right?

[izzyimpart]

"Von Economo Neuron"

Mixed media made from a found and broken rosary, found and broken chain, a dead butterfly, and found charger cords, 2025

[ramonasphotos]

.

[anocana]

to a first approximation i think the key questions for philosophy of mathematics to answer are:

what do and don't we use mathematics to understand, both empirically and conceptually? 2 and 3 are somewhat subquestions of this one.

why is mathematics so useful for understanding some things, like the movements of the planets, but so much less useful for other things, like people's decisions?

what makes something mathematically interesting or uninteresting? why do we do these calculations and not those? in an axiomatic system, why do we prove the theorems we do, and not other statements which follow equally from the axioms?

what are the real practices of mathematics? how do they vary between times and places? why do they take the forms they do?

are there ideal practices, and if so what are they? do they vary between times and places?

what is the relationship between real and ideal practices? can or should one side be changed for the sake of the other? if so, how?

how and why do mathematical practices work? what is mathematical understanding?

why is there such fertile cross-pollination between different fields of mathematics? why do techniques and constructions developed for specific purposes so often find entirely unexpected and unpredictable uses?

what is the ontological status of mathematics? we often talk about mathematical objects "existing". how should we understand this "existence"? in what senses do mathematical objects exist or not exist?

insofar as mathematical objects can be said to exist, which ones exist? do they have a nature? what is it?

what properties should a foundational understanding of mathematics have, and how much should we value each of them? formality, consistency, minimality, canonicity/truth, epistemological parsimony, capability to accommodate real practice, closeness to the activities of real practice? constructivity, computability?

what conceptual system best exemplifies them?

which of the above questions are important or unimportant, and why? should any be merged, or divided further?

(extra credit) consider how people have answered all of these questions before. how do the answers to the non-4 questions vary between contexts, times, places? why do they take the forms they do? would your answers vary between contexts? should they?

[hanssloane]

Winter Storm II

Anna Marie Savage (b.1966)

The Open University in Ireland