X:  [announcing] I'd like to talk more.
Y: [sitting] What about?
X:  I'm not sure yet.  Can someone want to talk about something which they're not sure what is?
Y: [rising] Isn't that what the case is usually?  Of course.
X:  Then where would they start?
Y:  Who says they have to start anywhere? 
X:  Yes.  So what is it to start.
Y:  I don't think I know.
X: Again?  I think that's just giving up; you're meant to be smart.
Y: I never said I was smart...
X: [verifies; acknowledges] Hm.  So what is the meaning of a beginning?
Y: All things considered I would suppose that a 'beginning' brings with it a notion of finity.
X: [practically annoyed] As opposed to what?
Y: Very good; but predictable.  I mention finity; you question it.  I say predictable.
X:  Yes, why?
Y:  Because a human would say that.
X: [again] 'A human would say that'?
Y: Infinity is a difficult concept.  Many have gone mad studying it.
X: I thought you said 'mad' was meaningless.
Y: Technically, though there is a general agreement on something we assume to be verdical.  Many people - smart people - who have studied infinity have lost any idea on what that agreed reality is.   [faint irony] Really, it is essential for day-to-day functioning.
X: Boring.
Y: [thinking aloud] I know..
X: So back to what is predictable.
Y: [preoccupied] -- Yes, of course.  You expressed dissatisfaction with the concept of the finity.  Do you have a problem with the concept?
X: I think so.
Y: [confident and teachery] Why.
X: I suppose because finity is a limitation.  I don't like a limitation; people should be able to do whatever they want whenever they want.
Y: Ok.
X: Ok?
Y: [thinking aloud] Yes..
X: No shredding analysis?
Y: Not immediately.
X: Why?  You need time to think?
Y: No.  I thought we established I wasn't of that nature.
X: Then howcome?
Y: Because it would make our dialogue sound false.  Thinking about it, to be any good at being taking seriously it should ideally resemble plausible human experience.
X: But howcome?
Y: Otherwise people won't take it seriously.
X: And they should take it seriously?
Y: Yes.
X: Why?
Y: Because it has a lot to teach them.  But I've finished my pause now.  You said life should be infinite; people should be able to do what they want.
X: Yes.
Y: And my analysis?
X: That was what I asked earlier.
Y: [throwaway] Laughable.
X: [amuse / disbelief] Laughable!
Y: [dead serious] Yes..
X: Because it's predictable?
Y: Well it is yes; but I just generally find it amusing.
X: Why amusing?
Y: Because it's all about what you think.   We did discuss earlier; the world is there.  It is yours, perhaps, but that's hardly to say you have any control over it.   I think people tend to be too opinionated.  You forget that the world does not care for your personal preferences.  It exists on anyway.  Rather than make up your mind about this or that, effort should be invested in trying to figure out how reality is put together; if that be at the expense of this or that incidental preference, then so be it.   I would encourage it, actually.
X: Yeah, probably; but that's still an opinion you have.
Y: Yes, but its altruistic, in that its point of focus is the welfare of others, who are always far more interesting and important.  As I said; I am no one.
X: So?
Y: Perhaps it is a concept worthy of your consideration.
X: ...but how can you be no one?
Y: [shrug] Why, easily; you just are.  There isn't a method; that is quite the point.
X: But what if you're not sure?
Y: Uncertainty is attachment.  Anonymity is non-attachment.  It is something you do by doing it.  It cannot be explained or verified or described.  Quite the aphorism; you must work it out for yourself.

The Hatter.

[White.  Minimalist].

[Two characters; one wanders; back-stage left towards front stage-right.  Speech is generally unhinged; out of lucid disorientation rather than malice though.

Other stands at front-stage right.  Dressed unusually, but perfectly [social] normal; intently gazing at something inconsequential; 'furrowed brow'].

X: 'Hi'
Y:'[delight] Hello'
X:'-- How are you'.
Y:'Very good'
X:  'Cool.  Where are we'
Y: 'Have you seen this?  Have a look at it'
[prop handed over].  It doesn't belong here'.
X: [interest] ...Where is here?
Y:  Where is it not?
X:  It doesn't have a name?
Y: I'm afraid I don't understand.
X:  Here.  What's this place called.
Y: To whom?
X [stumped] - Generally.
Y:  I'm not sure what that means...
X:  Ok.  [Y begins getting out a cloth; makes to put in on the floor].
X: [four seconds]  Then who are you?
Y: [amused at question; happy] Who am I not?
X:  Do you have a name?
Y: -Not particularly one that matters.
X:  What matters then?
Y:  -I'm not sure.
X: -- So you don't know.
Y:  [quick] -Haven't the faintest idea.
X:  Ok. [subject change] I don't know where I am.
Y:  Does anyone?
X:  [pensive pause; four seconds] You're called the hatter.
Y:  I am.
X:  And why is that?
Y:  Why what?
X:  [patient]  Why are you called the hatter.
Y: 'The Hatter'?  'The hatter'?  Profitless chatter.
X:  -Profit to whom though.
Y: [pleased] Exactly!
X:  So.  We are nowhere.
Y:  Yes.
X:  And you are no one?
Y:  [gaily; at the irony] I am no one!
X: [remembering, but analytical] ..I thought you were always called the Mad hatter.
Y: [pregnant]; Ah. 
X:  Yet you say that you are just 'the hatter'.
Y:  [following lines of thought] Yes..
X: Perhaps it would be polite to give your full name.
Y: [teaching] Ah, yes but then everyone would not understand it would they!
X:  'What is mad'?
Y: Precisely.
X: ....well what is mad then.
Y: Existence.
X: 'Existence'?
Y: Subjective perception.
X: Is this play mad.
Y: Probably.  Though its more a dialogue than a play.
X:  Maybe its mad based on the assumption that it isn't?  In the first place?
Y:  Maybe.  Though people are more mad generally.
X:  How?
Y: [assesses X; is satisfied] The world cannot exist without you who is there to see it.
X:  Ok...
Y:  If one world is perceived one way, then that is the way of that world.  If another does so different, it is  matter of different worlds.
X:  Different worlds..
Y:  Yes.  Different as opposed to deviant.  So it becomes more about each's simultaneous totality.  And how each fundamental in itself.
X:  'Deviant'.  So the idea of 'norm' is unstable?
Y:  Incredibly.
X:  What makes it unstable.
Y: Normal is a judgement; people make judgements; people are raised differently; ideas of normal follow differently.  One cannot view the world without superimposing one's own existential paradigm on it.
X:  Existential paradigm.
Y: Yes.
X:  Bit of a mouthful.
Y: Yes it is.
X:..... are you going to clarify?
Y: Do you wish me to?
X: Well yes!
Y: Well; you live.  You have your world; I live, I have mine.  Our fundamental personalities are shaped by our individual experiences.  This set unique experiences, I suppose, becomes your own paradigm, based on subjective experience, which you filter the world through; eventually.
X:  But what is the world?  Just perceptual?
Y:  I think so.   Essentially, you are quite awful.
X: [amused] I am?
Y:  Yes.  Because you put your own paradigm on everything.  It's so self-important.
X:  Ok.  So what do you do then?
Y:  I?  I occupy no conceptual space.
X:  [probing] Why.
Y:  Because I do not know what conceptual space is.