It is a very bad thing to be an honest bird in a forest of liars—birds who chirp that the sun is shining even when it isn’t, or that blonde little girls are really egg-eating serpents.  The funny part is their rightness, as the sun technically always shines, yes, and that humans do in fact consume a lot of eggs.  This is strangely a problem, though, applied without nod to the context of form; what bizarrely is ‘always’…yet and often not-at-all…depends entirely on the truth of one’s oblivious perspective.  Birds who sing optimistic songs have rarely thought in detail on the matter scientifically; the appointment is a classic demonstration of allusive faith, no more or less aware than any stark observation.

Perhaps the case of a bird is too complex for comparison, tinged by actual experience of the unclouded daylight in our original question.  This depends on the species of bird, as well as flying height and other vital imperatives accorded to their perspective(s).  A ‘normal’ bird will only say what it sees or has seen, not provide speculation or conjecture, which would be just as truthful as direct indication.  Of course the sun always does what is afforded by its nature; this does not make it ‘shining’ or, in essence, at all clear.

To recompense the first point, I’ll review.  A bird, diplomatically or not, pointing out its own skew is more likely a rain cloud instead of fresh air.  As majority rules, what is twittered most readily also seems most likely true, regardless of plain common sense…also known as observance.  Slightly different than sheer observation, observance encompasses the reflective art of pointed intelligence, or, recruitment of data and a well-rounded tolerance for multi-faceted views.  A single bird among many has little chance of establishing itself philosophically; a case of too many voices making mince of the pie.  Its invocations are renitent at least and rebellious at worst, neither quality of which are endearing to its proper class en masse.

Whether by theory or technicality, literality must not be taken so lightly as to neglect its components.  Truth is truth, yes, hypothetically (and bureaucratic religious thought doesn’t count.) Truth is a visible thing, and vision varies obscurely from one bird to the next.  My accusation, however, is that most birds aren’t really looking…would rather tweet what they think they’ve heard or want to be said.  Such lackadaisical banter is no meaningful substitute for raw, plethoric honesty and subjective admittance.  It seems to me that real thinking calls for requisite blinking; otherwise, the so-called viewer may be blinded entranced.