A possibility that had seemed enticing but had then closed down opens up again, and I am mildly disturbed by involuntary thoughts, hopes, imaginary scenarios, calculations ... involuntary and automatic, I suppose, to be swatted away, but interesting how they arise ... and how they subside. One has to ride them, like high winds that will blow themselves out. Such thoughts can of course be completely ruthless, psychopathic even, and some people can be terrified of this aspect of themselves (but think of successful politicians). Perhaps the point of the psychopath is that they are not in possession of countervailing estimations of their calculations. I am sure I am not alone in the swift ruthlessness of my own instinctive thinking when some opportunity or situation arises ... lightning fast to see advantage ... nor alone in being able to override this automatism from an ethical perspective. And then there is a distinction between wishes and wants.

The phrase 'calculative thinking' comes to mind. it's a phrase with a negative gloss in the writing of many of my Wittgensteinian colleagues, perhaps because they assume that calculation is amoral. But everything depends on the terms within which the calculations are conducted, what else ....

But all this has made me think also about the focus of my published writing. Sometimes it seems to be just badly focused because, as I am inclined to think, I am aware of too many audiences that I feel I need to please or satisfy. Is it better simply to have one audience, though? That seems unlikely, because the audiences indicate how many-aspected reality is, to be seen from many perspectives if it is to be seen adequately.

But my friend Tony says that context is all since it determines the centre from which one writes and, indeed, one would probably write differently perched on a rock in the Atlantic, which is what I propose to do, so let us see ...