0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

lefty bullshit

If I stay in-front of you and choose to step to the left; you are on the right; yet if I choose to step to the right; you are on the left. There's no suggested left vs right conflict (imbalance); only a perceivable left/right balance for choice at the center.

There's no parasite vs host conflict just the implication of...if more weakness; then more exploitation thereof and if less weakness; then less exploitation thereof.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

trying to defend the fucking parasites. Most people I know get rid of parasites when they see them.

A tick doesn't represent a parasite...it parasitically exploits a host weakness if an opportunity presents itself. This isn't about the state of being a parasite; but about the dynamic of behavior within a balance based system. Weakness tempts exploitation.

Ignorance represents the host weakness; which attracts the parasitic response of suggestion. Only nature offers (perceivable towards perceiving); hence all suggestions exploiting the ignorance of need (perceivable inspiration) for want (suggested information). It doesn't matter how many of the few "parasites" you kill; the ignorant many still want their suggestions and that represents an opportunity tempting everyone else to exploit it.

The entire MO of banding together to take down the parasites; so far led the many to be ruled by those who claim persecution; while ruthlessly persecuting and gave the few the power to control every bond made against them; because those who try to bond together (choice to choice) ignore the natural bond (balance to choice) and that ignorance represents the weakness being exploited by the parasitic few.

Living within the natural order (process of dying) implies the need to resist (living) temptation (dying)...not attacking or defending others based on suggestions.

As for getting rid of parasites...which parasites has mankind getting rid of? What are the implications of the ignorant many being ruled by the parasitic few for getting rid of parasites?

Their hold on power over people far more pervasive than just suggestion

The natural order...life being moved from inception towards death represents the incoming power (velocity); while living within represents expressing (growth) or repressing (loss) power; depending on resisting the natural order or falling for the temptation to follow suggested orders.

The living cannot hold anything within the process of dying; but the few can suggest the many to want to hold onto suggested values; which in return distracts them from getting flushed away based on their lack of resistance. Civilization represents the domestication of free will by means of suggestion, and all the narratives of rise and fall are designed to distract from the ongoing natural order taking apart whatever the temporary chaos within builds.

It is economic

Being perceiving within perceivable represents being temporary evaluation within ongoing value. Consenting to suggested values (money) tempts one to devalue ones own choice of evaluation. The highest value in existence represents the temporary evaluation thereof; which the many are tempted to ignore for the suggested values by the few. What do the few do with the power of evaluating values for the many? Bury their evaluation under exponentially increasing debt; while out-valuing their access to perceivable value with exponentially increasing price-tags.

The many even consented to the suggestion of "intellectual property" under the umbrella of copyright; while ignoring that being perceiving within perceivable implies the status quo of partial mimicking whole. The perceiving can only copy from all perceivable.

The real economy of frugality represents each ones free will of choice at the center of a balance based system.

carefully orchestrated mind control

That represents choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law; which was industrialized for mass population control as RELIGION; noun (Latin religio) - "to bind anew"; which tempts the those who consent to ignore balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law; hence the original bond between the partial (living) and the whole natural order (dying).

The suggestion of others tempts one to ignore being within the source of perceivable sound; hence representing the resonance (need) or dissonance (want) within...depending on responding choice.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

It wasn’t just suggestion, it was blatant lies

Nature (perceivable) doesn't lie; hence any false information represents a suggestion by those within nature.

blatant lies: “if you get vaxxed you can’t catch covid

That implies your consent to want or not want suggested "vax" and "covid". Furthermore; "can't" aka "can nothing" represents a suggested state tempting one to ignore that the perceiving within perceivable "can everything"...success at attempting represents a different issue.

Ask yourself if true vs lie represents a rebranding of you wanting vs not wanting the suggestions of others, and if that represents your consent required to give those suggesting the power to define; redefine and contradict the meaning of the suggested at their will?

In other words...only if you consent to believe in a suggested "truth" can others contradict it as a "lie".

3
free-will-of-choice 3 points ago +4 / -1

The people behind this should all be executed for what they did to humanity.

What does it say about humanity if a "super-fit athlete" isn't strong enough to resist suggestions by others? Killing those who exploit suggestion only tempts to further ignore the weakness to ignore perceivable (need) for suggested (want).

It's the host that is responsible for the weakness; not the parasites exploiting it.

their hold on power

The power of the suggesting few represents the willing consent of the many to whatever is being suggested to them.

It was shown to the many that "I can't breathe" leads to death; yet the many willingly ignored the implication when consenting to the next suggestion: "put a mask over your nose and mouth".

3
free-will-of-choice 3 points ago +3 / -0

George Soros's epic, multi-decade crime spree...

...rothschild's epic, multi-century crime spree...khazarian/jew epic, multi-millennial crime spree?

What about the ignorance towards natural law by all the others; hence allowing crime to fester within?

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

How to combat Monopolies

Comprehension grown by adaptation to perceivable MONO- (singular) POLY- (plural); while resisting the temptation to ignore it for suggested "monopoly" and that ain't combat either; it's balance.

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

save your energies

a) is temporary living within the ongoing process of dying "yours" or your opportunity to participate in existence?

b) if living (resistance) within dying (velocity) represents the internal power of energy; then does reacting (growth) within enacting (loss) represents "saving" or "investing"? What does temporary life "save"?

20-famous-people-with-autism

a) parasite trying to blend in: "hey fellow autistic people..."

b) FAME, noun [Latin fama; Greek. from to speak.] aka the suggested word tempting the ignorance of the perceivable sound.

c) AUT (self) -ISM (suggestion by others)...a contradiction in terms.

Some of us are comfortable with the aligned reality that MANY...

a) all perceivable reality differentiates into each perceiving one...not "us" or "many". Collectivism represents a suggested choice tempting the ignorance of UNITY (Latin unitas; the state of being one; oneness).

b) does temporary living within the ongoing process of dying aka the struggle to resist the temptation of velocity sounds like a "comfortable" existence or a response-ability (choice)?

c) does living needs to "align" with the reality of dying or does it struggle to resist the temptation of dying to prolong the sustenance of living before dying?

we love, care and value

a) love (want) implies vs hate (not want)...a conflict (reason) caused by consenting to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).

b) does it matter if one cares (want) or not cares (not want) about breathing or does one need to react (living) to enacting (dying) anyway?

c) what if perceivable (value) towards perceiving (evaluation)? Can there be a higher value in existence than evaluation?

have either allowed, consented to or are still “herding”

a) does the one living has to allow others to live or does one need to adapt to the process of dying?

b) does perceivable inspiration require consent by the perceiving or does the perceiving need to adapt to the perceivable to sustain self; while simultaneously resist the temptation to consent to suggested information by others?

c) can one herd others without suggestion? What if adaptation to inspiration grows ones comprehension of perceivable; which increases his efficiency to sustain self; which grows his resistance to the suggested temptations by others; which lower the potential of others being able to suggest temptation; which allows others to resist the temptation to ignore perceivable inspiration; hence also allowing them to grow (living) themselves instead of tempting others into loss (dying)?

From a different angle...the few tempt the many to follow suggested orders; while ignoring that the natural order (being moved from inception towards death) implies resistance from those within.

they are so judgmental

If one fell for the temptation of choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; while ignoring balance (perceivable) to choice (perceiving) natural law; then one a) shirked response-ability (choice) onto others; which b) tempts one to blame others for the consequences of ignored free will of choice, hence judging the minds of others instead of cleaning up ones own memory.

their own eminent demise

The many are following the suggested orders of the few (progressivism) towards "wanted" outcomes; while ignoring the "need" to adapt to perceivable origin. They seek eminence over others by escaping response-ability over self.

my cue to follow the path

My (life) cue (suggestions by others) to follow (towards death) the path (inception towards death)...tempts to ignore the perceivable need to resist suggested temptations while within the path.

my understanding

Understanding represents "standing under" the suggested information by others; which tempts one to ignore growing comprehension as the perceiving by adaptation to all perceivable inspiration (knowledge). The few use the term "knowledge" to tempt the many to stand under suggested information aka "who wants to know?".

One doesn't need to stand under the suggesting choices of others; one needs to grow self discernment about representing choice (evaluation of perceiving) within the center of balance (perceivable value). Choice exists within balance (need/want aka perceivable/suggested) as form (life) within the momentum (balance) of flow (inception towards death).

plan

PLAN (representation of any projected work) aka RE (response to) PRESENT (presented aka perceivable) -ATION (through action; hence enacted upon the reaction of those perceiving it) + EN'ERGY, noun [Greek. work.] - "internal or inherent power".

doesn’t seem to include

Suggestion tempts one to isolated oneself (reaction) from being "included" within everything (enacting). If one follows a suggested plan; one is tempted to ignore being moved forwards already, hence being tempted to ignore resisting; which would make friction noticeable aka impression (perception) meeting compression (comprehension) for either expression (growth) or repression (loss).

Wishing you all continued PEACE, LIGHT, LOVE…from a SAFE distance

Thank you for the inspiration.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

Before suggested words comes perceivable sound. Consenting to the former tempts one to ignore the latter.

words have meaning...meaning being conveyed.

A moving system communicates inspiration to those within through motion, hence enacting (value) towards reacting (evaluation). In other words...reaction cannot define meaning within enacting; only react to predefined (perceivable) or ignore it (suggestion).

1
free-will-of-choice 1 point ago +2 / -1

Suggestion: Battle Beagle

Perceivable: HarmlessYardDog

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

Withing urban environments....learn to grow for the sustenance of self and share fruits of your labor with those who also grow; which will establish expanding food distribution without ever having enough food on hand worthy of robbing; plus many backups if one gets robbed. Also; utilize information of those who hoard to direct those who seek by force; which gives you a defense and a bargaining tool. Stay away from any food distribution centers as the dependent will likely be culled for their dependency.

Within suburban environments...don't fortify (marking yourself as a target; which includes neighborhood compounds); instead distract from yourself (derelict habitation; disheveled appearance). Breed free roaming rabbits and encourage others to protect the youth until old enough to also breed; use any swimming pools to get fish and or algae going; setup any container to collect rainwater, and distract from any ground water access.

Within any other environment....enjoy growing your stuff; while setting yourself up with skills required for rebuilding later on. Bonus...keep water moving and connect as many water sources as possible to get an energy grid going. You will quickly learn how to utilize it while doing it.

-3
free-will-of-choice -3 points ago +1 / -4

Try implication...if loss (dying) then growth (living). For life to grow one needs to resist the temptation of dying.

Next...if form (life) within flow (inception towards death); then to be temporary (growth) implies out of; within and in response to ongoing (loss).

As for language; what comes first...perceivable sound or suggested words? In what language does nature communicate itself to all within?

-8
free-will-of-choice -8 points ago +2 / -10

I count this all as loss

Living represents the temporary growth within the ongoing loss of dying.

Counting represents the suggested temptation to ignore growing one (perceiving) within all (perceivable) for counting the suggestions of other ones. Two does not represent a perceivable state; but the choice to count one and another one as "two" aka suggested sameness over perceivable differentiation.

in a race all the runners run, but only one receives the prize...

The race represents dying aka being moved from inception towards death (start to finish); while each living "one" within represents not just the runner running (hence adapting to being moved); but the highest value (perceivable) in existence...evaluation (perceiving) thereof.

so run that you may obtain it

That represents the suggestion to ignore that everything perceivable is already freely available to each one perceiving it within, and instead of adapting to it (need) one is tempted (want) to obtain suggested outcomes.

nina leone

NINA (from aninna; anna; gracious) LE (the) ONE - "the gracious one".

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +2 / -2

I wanted to be a pirate

  • PI'RATE, noun [Latin pirata.] - "a freebooter on the seas; a vessel which sails without legal commission, for the purpose of plundering other vessels indiscriminately on the high seas"

As form (life) within flow (inception towards death)...flow represents the sea; which commits the formed vessel. Those who ignore this for the suggestions of others can then be indiscriminately plundered.

The behavior of his tribe represents piracy; utilizing suggested currency (money); maritime admiralty law and in his case the main-stream to plunder everyone else....and why wouldn't he view others as goyim; cattle (cow-boys) while using sodomy to break female sovereignty (princess)?

3
free-will-of-choice 3 points ago +6 / -3

the growth of nazism

"Hi; I'm the elephant in the room and go by 'international zionism spearheaded by ashke-nazis', don't mind me waving my giant schnozz around; while trampling civilizations underfoot"..."who am I kidding; I'm invisible to reason"

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

becoming what?

a) life isn't outcome oriented; since death is predefined at inception. Life in the momentum of motion (inception towards death) is balance oriented; hence representing the responding "free" will of choice to the "dom"inance of balance (free-dom).

b) BECOM'ING, - "suitable; adapted to circumstances" aka choice within balance adapting to ever changing circumstances as temporary form (life) within ongoing flow (inception towards death). Becoming implies the opportunity for temporary growth (form) within ongoing loss (flow)...unless ignored.

c) the foundation of "what" represents EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power"

Michelle

Ain't never gonna happen; Mike.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

personal responsibility

Person aka per sonos (by sound) and response-ability (aka as choice to perceived sound).

humans have been tricked

a) HU'MAN (hebrew; form); hence formed (life) out of flow (inception towards death).

b) the trick represents choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law; while ignoring perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) natural law.

mindset

What sets the mind...suggested information (choice of want) or perceived inspiration (choice of need)? What comes first...suggested words or perceived sound?

catch phrase

Where does one "catch" a suggested word (phrase)? Within mind (Latin; mens) - "memory".

What if memory needs to be used for adaptation to perceived inspiration (like a ram); while resisting the temptation to be misused for accumulation of suggested information (like a hard-drive)?

invented by humans

INVENT', verb transitive (Latin invenio, inventum; in and venio) - "to come to; to find". To come to implies out of; hence to be (form) out of (flow). To find that which already is represents growing comprehension of perceived...not standing under (understanding) suggested.

things that are directly relevant to today's situation.

ONE is situated at the center of ALL; as form (life) within flow (inception towards death); as choice within balance (momentum of motion). Therefore ALL is directly related to each ONEs situation within.

2
free-will-of-choice 2 points ago +3 / -1

"the whole world" through the suggested lens of the parasitic few who tell-a-vision (television) to enter-tame-mind (entertainment) of the consenting many.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

cannot make sense

That implies "can-not(hing) make sense" aka ignorance of perceived everything for suggested nothing. Making sense implies ignoring to perceive everything through ones senses. You read and chose to respond to something you sensed; while suggesting that it cannot make sense.

We are being manipulated to behave like this...to ignore perception; to ignore senses, and to view anything suggested through a conflict (reason). No other one can change your consent to being manipulated like; only ones own choice can do that. I cannot give you understanding; I can try to point out the deception of suggested information; while making it uncomfortable for others to keep ignoring perceived inspiration; but alas....free will of choice is upon oneself.

I have to assume

As form (life) within flow (inception towards death) one exists within constant change; which means one can only assume; never define.

you are doing this intentionally

I respond as choice to balance for self sustenance; because I "need" to; not because I "want" to suggest information to others. I instead use others as inspiration to adapt to.

You on the other hand are making the choice to "want" suggested information over the "need" of adapting to perceived inspiration, and I can only point it out; not change your own choice for you.

to aggressively forum slide

This aggression you perceive from suggested information represents the conflict of reason (want vs not want). It ignores need (respond to balance) for want (imbalance). I simply adapt to whatever is on the front-page: followed by however others adapt to it. Neither do I offer (starting threads); not do I judge (no up/down votes), and mostly I don't even read which forum or usernames I respond to.

You can utilize this by throwing at me whatever inspires you; and I will take it apart by putting it into my understanding of natural law; while pointing out the suggested corruptions of our parasitic few; which in return grows my own understanding. You can also ignore it; be offended; trying to attack the source of information you don't want or lack to understand etc. It's your free will of choice.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

It's what one shapes out of it; not what others want it to be. I adapt to what inspires; you try to find meaning in information suggested by others; hence the conflict (want vs not want) towards the suggested.

Ask yourself...does nature offer your perceiving senses information without meaning? If not..does it suggest information?

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

life force vs flow versus form

Question flow (inception towards death) representing force of velocity (forward movement), and form (life) representing force of resistance (choice based adaptation to balance).

Afterwards; question if ongoing flow causes a momentum that represents the balance; within which temporary form has the choice to perceive; to adapt; to grow...

After that...question why you suggest a "versus" (imbalance) within a perceived balance?

One reason One is never shown to be equal or not equal to One is that?

Shown implies suggested information; which for choice represents want vs not want; hence ignoring perceived everything for suggested nothing. Your example of equal (want) vs not equal (not want) represents the conflict of reason caused by consenting to suggested information (thought education).

As for equality...ALL represents ONE in energy; while each ONE within ALL represents a self differentiation of energy into potentiality (loss through flow) and potential (growth of form). The parasites suggest the opposites by trying to shape us equal as to destroy the differentiation (through miscegenation); which in return corrupts our perception of differences (communicated inspiration).

All the differences one perceives are used to inspire one to sustain self by resisting as form within flow (balancing by choice).

flow (not life)

What if life (form) exists within the momentum (balance) of flow? What are the implications of calling something (form) within everything (flow)...nothing (not life)?

flow when not taught in classrooms (not flow) LIFE begins to permeate into reality

Flow represents the foundation for all form; and the majority of us chooses to ignore it for the suggestions of other form. As being alive; you cannot perceive your inception and your death; because you are balancing as form in-between the momentum of flow. Yet; you can easily understand your own beginning (inception) and end (death) by adapting to what you perceive through the responses to others being moved.

This is how form can perceive everything within momentum of flow; yet only comprehend the flow causing it. Growing this comprehension is why one perceives movement as inspiration to respond to. Comprehending to represent ONE within ALL aka form within flow; choice within balance; temporary within ongoing; potential within potentiality; growth within loss; chaos within order; magnetic resistance within electric velocity represents self discernment.

Only after growing self discernment can one further comprehend that ALL represents ONE in energy; after which one has a foundation to build assumption upon; because the only thing that cannot change within constant change are the rules that define how change operates; which represent the laws of nature for the responding form within. Perception and comprehension have to put into balance first aka kept within momentum by adaptation to perceived inspiration.

thank you

Thank you for the inspiration.

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

I remember all kinds of shit from the 50s on

If you remember the birth of your son while standing next to him; that implies ignoring that which is (your son) for that which isn't (his birth) aka ignoring perceived reality (inspiration) for suggested fiction (information). Ask yourself why would you remember (respond to memory) instead of responding to whatever your son inspires you to respond to? This represents ones choice of want (temptation) over need (response ability).

You even call it "all kinds of shit; when referring to the information you consent to store within your conscious memory. It is also that information we consent to pollute our memory with that causes the ego; the internal monologue based on upheld information; while ignoring to adapt to ongoing inspiration.

This is why the parasitic few represent "happy merchants" aka those who suggest temptation for the price of consent.

memory is also contained in books

All suggested information; all words shaped by the choice of others out of perceived inspiration to suggested those who consent to it to ignore perceived inspiration for suggested information.

Nature doesn't need to be unlocked and stored as information; each ONE within ALL needs to grow ONEs comprehension of ALL perceived. This is about your growth; not about collectively wasting our existence to rebuild the "Library of Alexandria" and the "Tower of Babel" over and over again.

A world of lies represents the response to a world that ignores perceived change (inspiration) for suggested truth (information)...only if the many consent to the affixed (information); while ignoring the ongoing (inspiration) can they few contradict (lie) the suggested (truth) at will.

an impartial rendering of actual events

Two tests for this...a) the game Telephone; Chinese whispers; Stille Post...make a line out of a group; whisper information to the first and let them whisper it to each other until you get a completely different information at the end. Why? Because choice can shape suggested information at will and the temptation to do so (whispering) will always corrupt suggested information. Why is that? Because choosing want (information) over need (inspiration) as form (life) within flow (inception towards death) implies ignoring self sustenance of choice within balance (need/want) for the suggested choices of others (want vs not want) aka imbalance through ignorance of balance.

b) a goal at a soccer game...afterwards ask the shooter; the goalie; the players; the trainers and the onlookers about what just happened and they will each suggest a different understanding of the same perceived event. Why? Because flow (ALL) differentiates itself into individual form (ONEs) to be able to communicate inspiration to each ONE as to get them to respond to balance for self sustenance. If everything percieved would be the same; then what would inspire form to struggle for sustenance within the momentum of flow? Hence the need for differentiation; hence us each representing a different ONE (comprehension) out of the same ALL (perception) aka temporary growth potential out of ongoing loss of potentiality.

In short...the many are being deceived to ignore that they each perceive the same; yet understand it differently. Growing this comprehension is being done by choice based adaptation to perceived (inspiration)...not by consent to suggested (information).

If we are within motion; I cannot use affixed words to suggest the meaning of ongoing motion to you; without tempting you to ignore perceived (reality) for suggested (fiction); which afterwards would give me the power to control through my suggested meaning (fiction) your understanding of perceived meaning (reality).

How is it that every other life-form can perceive; adapt to and comprehend "grass" without anyone telling them that it's called "grass"? A moving nature does not communicate itself with labels; but as movement through inspiration to all within; which is what all the other life-forms adapt to.

We are going to have to have faith based society (in God)

Faith towards God you say; but you didn't consent to God, but to those who suggested "God" to you "in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti" aka "in the name of". Those are the same who suggest you that "in the beginning was the word..."; yet you can easily understand that perceived sound comes before choice can shape words out of it.

The few suggest creationism (out of nothing) to deceive the many to ignore transmutation (out of everything) aka flow to form (inception); form within flow (life); form to flow (death) aka ONEs transmutation out of base ALL (simple alchemy).

One cannot perceive creation...everything suggested as "new" was shaped out of everything already in existence. One cannot shape thought without responding to perceived input first. The origin of "new" represents "nu" aka now; which implies the every changing moment of existence aka the momentum of ongoing flow where temporary form can exist as choice based response to balance.

All of this can be understood; yet our beliefs are restricting our understanding of perceived inspiration in favor of suggested information. Take ones fundamental needs...(water; food; shelter)...does one need to believe in any of them or adapt as choice to balance (need/want) anyway?

Even simpler...does breathing require believing? If not...then reconsider SPIR'IT, noun [Latin spiritus, from spiro, to breathe, to blow. The primary sense is to rush or drive.] aka forms adaptation to flow. After understanding that; question if patris (ALL) et filii (ONE) et spiritus sancti (adaptation as ONE to ALL) is being suggested to hide the perceived inspiration (from within spirit) under suggested information (from within form)?

a guiding principle

Life being moved from inception towards death...is it outcome oriented or maybe balance oriented until predefined outcome? What if the few suggest progressivism to deceive the many to choose to go with the flow instead of resisting it as form? By seeking outcomes; wanting achievements; trying to reach goals; putting hope towards etc. Always the suggestion of that which isn't (imbalance) for that which is (balance) aka the suggested inversion (suggested fiction) of perceived reality.

not be based on one editor.

What if being ONE within ALL implies the ONEness of ALL (energy)? What if ALL perceivable reality is based on the ONEness of energy self segregating into flow (loss) and form (growth) for internal self sustenance? What if ED'IT, verb transitive [from Latin edo, to publish; e and do, to give.] implies flow to form; not form to other form; while ignoring flow?

humans are so far from perfection

HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form, species.] + AN'IMAL, noun [Latin animal from anima, air, breath, soul.]...what if one represents form (human) animated (animal) by flow? And it only took the suggestion of two words (human vs animal) to deceive us to ignore balance for imbalance?

Perfection implies want for outcome; while ignoring need to respond to origin (balance). The parasitic few suggest us to want order out of chaos; for which we ignore being temporary chaos (form) out of ongoing order (flow).

upon this planet...

PLANE, noun [from Latin planus.] - "an even or level surface" + PLAN'ET, noun [Latin planeta; Gr. wandering, to wander]. Let me just quickly start my "plane" to fly over some curves; while keeping the "horizon" "level"...

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

ONE form within ALL flow. Everything you perceive represents a differentiated ONE (form) out of a differentiating ALL (flow). Inspiration can only be communicated by the movement (flow) of perceived differences (form).

Question "one person" by person (per sonos aka by sound) first aka what does it imply to be ONE resound to ALL sound? What does another resound represents for ONEself within ALL perceived sound?

Ask yourself...do you represent ONE within ALL? Do others represent each ONE within ALL? What doesn't represent being ONE within ALL? Also...represents implies responding (choice) to presented (perception).

-1
free-will-of-choice -1 points ago +1 / -2

What about this...does one represent form (life) within flow (inception towards death)?

If so; then was this ever pointed out to you throughout education? If not; then try to explain why?

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

to remember HISTORY...

a) question why suggested his-story always leaves out the main (re)actor of ALL reality...ONEself?

b) remember implies response to memory...what if the conscious memory needs to used like a ram (temporary storage of information for constant adaptation to perceived inspiration, and not like a hard-drive (accumulation of suggested information until capacity)?

c) what if one can be tricked to ignore that which is (reality) for memories of that which was (fiction) by simply suggesting it aka nostalgia; his-story; captured moments (pictures); motion pictures aka 0 (suggested information) over 1 (perceived inspiration)?

0
free-will-of-choice 0 points ago +1 / -1

could be living in any of a dozen entirely separate reality bubbles

Question if each ONE perceives ALL; yet lacks comprehension of what it means? Question if being ONE within ALL represents temporary growth potential (form aka life) within ongoing loss of potentiality (flow aka inception towards death)?

information we receive

What if ALL communicates itself to each ONEs perceiving senses within as inspiration; while all the other ONEs tempt us to ignore this for suggested information?

What if ONEs comprehension is being grown by choice based adaptation to ALL perceived...not by consenting to information suggested by another ONE?

It's divide and conquer on a mass mind control level.

What if choice represents the response to balance (need/want); with need representing adaptation to perceived inspiration and want representing consent to suggested information?

What if choosing want over need (temptation of ignorance) aka suggested over perceived causes a conflict (imbalance) between those who want versus those who do not want the suggested? What if this conflict (want vs not want) is being branded by those making the suggestions as "reason"?

What if the parasitic few use suggestion (-isms) to cause division (reason) among the many; while a) perpetuating those conflicts by suggesting both sides endless contradictions to keep them reasoning (talmudic reasoning) and b) what if the few can at will rebrand want vs not want into for example good vs evil; true vs false; believing vs not believing; rights vs left; feminism vs patriarchy; poor vs rich; McDonalds vs Burger King; PC vs consoles; Christianity vs Islam; Republican vs Democrats and so on?

What if free will of choice exists as the response to balance; yet with the choice to ignore it for suggested imbalance? What if balancing requires responsibility of choice to struggle as form within flow; while ignoring balance for imbalance represents a constant temptation to fall for?

beliefs form the foundation of the reality they're living in.

What if to believe or to not believe represents choice submitting to suggested choice of others? What if the industrialization thereof is called RELIGION, noun [Latin religio, from religo, to bind anew]; while the original bond under natural law represents offer (balance) response (choice)?

What if ignoring (choice) the perceived foundation of existence (balance) can be tempted by means of suggestion (of choices)?

the question of the origin of

ALL perceived originates out of flow; all suggested was shaped by choice of responding form out of perceived origin, while tempting those who consent to suggested to ignore perceived in the process.

Question if nature represents the source of perceived sound, and if suggested words are being shaped by choice out of the source of perceived sound? What if words allow those who suggest them to define how those who consent to them perceive sound? What if the suggestion of "insane person" deceives those who consent to its meaning to ignore Insane (in sanus aka within sound) + Person (per sonos aka by sound)?

If I teach others words it civilizes them; yet if I teach a dog words it domesticates him? Question mass domestication through suggested meaning over perceived meaning under the brand "civilization"...

do they lie continuously and intentionally

What if a lie represents the contradiction of a suggested truth? What if true represents the rebranding of "want", and lie that of "not want"...both caused by consenting the same suggested information? What's the difference between reasoning true vs false and want vs not want? Question "need" over reasoning want vs not want?

Why does one consent to the suggestion that "truth" represents a conflict with "false"? Does nature offer false information to ones perceiving senses?

foundational beliefs and are very hard to change

What if ongoing change (perceived inspiration) is what beliefs (suggested information) ignore? What if setting a belief into ones conscious memory represents the self restriction of both perceived inspiration and the comprehension thereof?

Another person will not be able to change a foundational belief held

Because a belief is being held by free will of choice; while in ignorance of having free will of choice; since consenting to believe suggested choices of others aka will to will submission and shirking of responsibility as choice within balance.

separate realities existing in the same space at the same time.

What if ALL (flow) self segregates into individual ONEs (form) to allow temporary growth (form) out of ongoing loss (flow)?

What if SPACE, noun [Latin spatium, space; spatior, to wander.] implies being ONE wandering within ALL as choice within balance?

What if TIME implies constant movement (tick; tick; tick...) and not affixed states (past; present and future)? What if the few deceive the many to ignore being form (life) within the ever changing moment(um) of flow (inception towards death) by suggesting them to ignore that which is for that which was (past aka the self inflicted trauma of upheld loss within memory); that which is for that which might be (future aka the self inflicted trauma of hope and fear), and corrupting that which is (momentum) for that which isn't (presents aka the self inflicted trauma of stress aka imbalance)?

view more: Next ›