Hypostulate: There is a direct relationship between stupidity (in Newtons, obviously) and a boy’s affection towards a specific girl (in beats–of the heart–per minute).
I said that a couple days ago, pretty much verbatim and I thought myself exceptionally clever. Here’s where I launch into a poorly structured pair of paragraphs (get it?) and attempt to explain something–that is clearly in want of linguistic skills far surpassing what I have been given–using pseudo-mathematics with deep undercurrents of economics. Enjoy.
Given the fickle nature of hearts, there can be quite a variation between the relative elasticities of the curve. This means that, given the proper conditions, there will be disproportionate increases of foolishness per unit increase of affection. A perfectly elastic relationship between affection and stupidity (effectively a supply of affection curve) would be the ideal representation, since there is virtually no increase of stupidity (for our purposes, mapped along the y axis) for any increment of affection (plotted on the x axis, ironically enough). This state is what I’d call “long run aggregate wise” or “maturement” where hearts are no longer given to vain conceptions of what it means to love actually and can increase distribution of affection without demanding a higher price of patience to offset the decrease in logical capabilities.
This observed relationship has thus led me to conclude that there is an inverse relationship between logical functions of the mind (x axis) and emotive reasonings of the heart (y axis). As one increases in percent possession of the being, the other must invariably concede territory, time, resources, and so forth to the other. Again, these relationships have variable elasticities. Some individuals need only sacrifice very little logical abilities to acrue large increases in emotional faculties. Conversely, these same individuals, given the proper stimuli, could also exhibit the “hormonal effect” whereby attempts to invest heavily in logical yields result in little or no change in emotional output. This state of perfect elasticity of the heart (i.e. the state where affections are impervious to rationalization) could also be referred to as, in layman’s terms, “having fallen head over heels for the damsel.” This could also be seen as the exemplary exception which proves the rule that presupposes consumer rationality.