The Philosophy of Bank Robbery

Often written strictly as money, "art" is founded in having different purposes usually rooted in how natural universal mechanics are able to be seen reflected in the different instances wherein it manifests whole or in any way at all. The reason for this explanation is to grow further what is to be understood by the word "bank" in the housing term of this titled narrative. That term being "The Philosophy of Bank Robbery". Bank robbery, itself, is when someone suppositionally takes art from a collecting body, wrongfully. It is wrong because it can not be accounted for - the art that is taken - correctly. Bank robbery is built around this principle, and from the different interpretations and impressions that are then found as parts to its pathology, inconsistencies are understood whole as supplementing mechanics of furthering elementary constituency.

When taken without full accountability the issues which arise eventually amount to be highly inflammatory, because of the unaccountability resulting in loss. In that light, bank robbery, articulated further in terming capacity as "art theft", accrues to be a wrongful action that is made right by not only returning the funds, or art, which was wrongfully taken, but also making right the wrong that is found to be relevant in the different instances where the stolen art has had a wrought and/or serial impact. From there, the delineative implications find their reciprocate purposes fo form along the prose of dividuate narratives granting of the constituents imparting of how the simple act of taking art, or money, can result in throes extracted as incorrect conduction. Bank robbery is unique for this reason. It is beyond the art. Regardless of whether or not it would otherwise begin freely, the principled extraction of theft is one that emphasizes why the fundamentals surrounding the associated philosophies are founded as they are.