Defining Delineations

To define is to articulate what lies within a concept, a population, a word, a paradigm. To delineate is to articulate what lies beyond boundaries of a concept, a population, a word, a gestalt. To extend learning, and loving, is to stretch this evolving articulation of boundaries between what lies within and without a concept, a population, a tradition, a still evolving word, a revolutioning, multiculturing, creolizing paradigm. When we become lost in reductive delineations we can become distracted from optimizing polypathic definitions. For example, Republicans, and, to a somewhat lesser extent, Democrats, in the USA, have begun a new tradition, and not a healthy one, of becoming more articulate definers of what it means to be One by loudly proclaiming we are not of the Other. Something similar could be said, unfortunately, about feminists and patriarchal fundamentalists as anti-feminists; which does not really evoke strong hetero family values in any traditional nutritional fertile sense I can think of. I guess we could call rape a form of intercourse, but not one that anyone would hope for in any semblance of a healthy way. Anyway, when Trumpians try to define the benefits of their proposed health care legislation, the first, and often last, phrase I hear is: It is not ObamaCare. Perhaps the only change will reside within a colloquial NonTitle, leaving further delineating boundaries between Trumpian and Obamian Care to evolve further at a later devolutionary time. But, in today's polarizing environment, health affordability and sustenance and pathology prevention issues are increasingly above our active political leadership's pay scale, beyond our collective rhetorical mission statements, now becoming who we are constitutionally not, because too internally divided by plutocratic-democratic complexities of who we might have become together, in and among a healthier wealthier regenerative spacetime paradigm.