Up until this point; the chain has only been as strong as it’s weakest link.
That is the going philosophy, but words can be arranged so that any subject is gospel disputation.
I do not intend to destroy the chain at it’s flaws or debunk a logical deduction of minor surface quality; no, I mean to expose the logic beneath it, under it’s superficial and blatant perspective.
Yes, it is an assumption that a chain can be fashioned of the finest materials, yet if one link is inadequate; it potentially compromises the structural integrity of the entire length. However, these principals or obvious findings, in effect are as faulty as the chain in question.
A scenario such as this is reliant upon these fixed parameters, which would normally be variables. One could rig experiments to test this simply; just make a steel chain with one single aluminum link and BINGO!
You have yourself a chain that proves the weakest link philosophy a viable scenario.
Yay! You have managed to derive obviousness from a controlled experiment! Nothing except satisfaction has been accomplished.
UNITY!!!!!
We are going to need either better chain or a better example for the sake of human inconsistency.
Humans are not steel, nor aluminum; no matter if the anatomy of a human contains these minerals or not. Furthermore, humans are very flimsy and flit about a scale of wonton whimsy. They are all built essentially out of the same exact things except for the consideration of things like application and development. Like steel, humans get harder when worked under specific conditions. This must be done to harden both the metal and the body/mind according to a specific set of learned standards.
Humans are naturally very weak; not exactly the best material to unite alike a chain would, in the first place!
What can be taken from this is not exactly as simple as just stating that the chain (no matter the material) is going to and always will break at it’s most flawed link. Every single time.
So, in a bond of human flesh; they may be comparatively weaker in chain formation. Besides, we have yet to consider the chain’s willingness to comply to it’s function as intended.
Have you ever heard a chain talk back?
Ever get any sass from a broken chain?
Would we still consider a human as a living thing, among the several links in this proverbial chain?
No, as a matter of factual discovery; no, humans are no longer “human” at this stage of bonding. They are discarded and disregarded as the failures of union and species, really.
How simple and easy it is, I have noticed; to witness one or many humans label other humans as “inhuman” or “inhumane” or “not the same”, when a broken chain link is still a chain link, without distinction of whether or not it can perform. It is still chain.
Iron does not prejudice iron.
Humans will not either; all ore can be prepared for use, as it desperately tries to unite in the smelter.
Humans when heated, rarely form unions.
There will be prejudices against each other though. YOU can’t help yourself. YOU must hold the hand in unity while harboring judgment for the link you are attached to. You will and you will without noticing if you think not.
These are the weakest links. Those who would deny they are, with no will to “better” themselves, for the benefit of a chain.
You have no idea what this virtual chain is used for.
Chain is for pulling; chain is for binding.
Chain is only around because the arms and applications of a human can break the bonds of twine and vine.
Chain is not for what it and all of it’s logic is surface-level intended for.
Chain is for interlocking and ultimately locking.
Chain is a tool. One used for working or stopping.
Would you wittingly accept the role of an instrument?
A form of unity that exists to segregate.
Fragmented, like that sentence. Comprised of linked together objects to perform the task of utmost human importance; binding something. This could translate to anything, really.
A chain can link and a chain can bind.
A human can also. Of course though, you or someone human would like to think of the human as the strongest link and never less than what glory a being of such magnificence could deserve. Perhaps that is an instinct for survival; alike the chain, you have no control over. Perhaps the “better” word, that accurately describes humanity (without bias) would be “being of such malfeasance or maleficent being”.
The strongest link has disappeared in this scenario; nowhere is there glory for the one who COULD have taken it all under load, provided the linkage had not broken at the weakest point. No one cares about you, the “strongest link”. That particular segment in the train of never ending want is capable of sustaining itself; let’s all just blame the plastic link!
As many times as I have personally upheld the “strong” end of the chain; it always gets shadowed by the ONE or few times that I was weak. I could fix the problems, single handedly for month’s straight on end and the split second that I was not in the “loop”- BAM! It was shattered and strew all over the place and the chain will be broken.
Instant chopped liver.
Now the strongest link is the weakest.
What is the tensile standard for chain? … I remind you. It is to perform, ceaselessly until it is no longer in existence. The chain does not rest. The chain does not complain. The chain only knows it’s purpose and does it to human specifications and expectations.
Great, already written expectations.
The lessons have been learned and yet the human will still have them; of the power in unity and the necessity to utilize a binding force that no mortal can break.
The chain has never, ever been as strong as the weakest link at all; for without the strongest links, the chain would not be as valued as it is to so many users and fashioners. It would be an invalid and illogical tool, incapable of its intended purpose, altogether.
Have we forgotten how the smith who makes the chain must use a “master link” in some applications? One designed to be the last link in an unbroken chain; essentially the one link that holds it all together.
The leader link.
Human leaders are often the most useless; just like the chain.
When the chain exceeds its load capacity, it will break no matter the integrity of any link; it will break at the master link first. This I have experienced, more than once… in humans OR steel.
Some know and will shore the weld on a master link in excess, in hopes to ensure it’s ability to remain intact, under load, so that the chain can reach it’s full load potential.
Oh how the chain can be designed and worked to eliminate weakness, alike mankind; but it seems flesh is a focus of comparison, when the strength of mind is often prevailing over “muscle”. A human link can remain mentally intact in situations where the body is ripping completely apart.
Just like the “inhuman” repair worker; the “toothless asshole” that has little or no value if they do not; the body will be tattered with time as the mind becomes so much more efficient in it’s functions until it is altogether useless to anyone and dead.
YOU don’t mind at all even!
No conjecture, this is factual data; collected over the course of many years in the chain of united humans. It is procedure to get them out, with replacements. Fix this and that- then ultimately fix the chain by eliminating it’s uncoordinated or unruly links and replacing them with “stronger” ones, who will abide without failure or reprisal.
The point is clear, if not overly apparent; life cannot be bound.
By rope or chain.
Or meat and bone.
Or words, when it boils down to nothing.
It has NEVER been the weakest links or otherwise compliantly complaisant with the role, who are to BLAME in the event of a breakage among mankind. There will be a name for what it is, it wants to be and what it is not; among men (humans). The “chain” is not as strong as the weakest link at all; who has made the chain must be blamed according to the next humanized deductions made by the species. The blacksmith must be lectured or punished for this infraction! They must be held accountable for such a faulty chain. Where in this argument is there a “fix”? How are we to bind ourselves with this “blamey” insufficient chain!? Where is the problem? Is it the maker or the materials; or are we “fair”? Do we think morally of ourselves to say, it’s not a matter of fault; it is only inevitable to break eventually. No harm done! Oh sweet normalcy among animals who can and will determine “irregular” status of others and of all life; matter in general!
Sure, I would believe that if there were enough in the “loop” who understand chain, as well as wear and tear on tools. There is not, however.
The chain is filled with links that don’t know that they are or want plays a part.
A chain can bind NOTHING, not even a fly; forever…or as long as it would satisfy one expecting the chain to work in a “normal” situation. In this way, it is apparent that it WILL break; not without its strongest AND weakest links, if given the appropriate circumstances.
When will a human ever be willing to be an inanimate object, against all their desperations to relate?
Then, what IS the cause for chain failure if not at the weakest and most structurally compromised link?
What causes chains to break?
What is responsible?
What can be so destructive to such incomparably binding prowess?
What is the KILLER of unity!?
Expectations?
Bonding practices?
What is the perspective of the environment we all wish to combat, in lieu of acceptance? How does the breakage affect anything other than the user of such bindings?
These are NOT questions with answers, more than they are the master links in all human perspective.
They break; no matter how well we weld.
“Use” is your magic word.
The point you needed to be led to, like the water of life that humanity can no longer stomach as a whole; the taste needs to be “better”. Which is why the chain was never dependent upon individual links for strength more than that it existed to pull or imprison.
The application.
The cause… but never the effect, in the eyes of a human, disappointed at its failure.
Of course the chain broke; you didn’t use it “properly”.
The “chain” will only ever be as strong as the one who thought it would “do the trick”. The force that made it required is the culprit. How can the determination of steel be measured against the skin of a sentient mind?
A bond of unity is only as strong as it’s purpose and the ones who are using it within specifications.
The chain is only as strong as the chain; and the humans doing the best of their worst, pulling it’s links apart.
Fartfist's Compendium of Artistic Expressions 