Question a) if the parasitic few deliberately suggest information to fill up the memory of the many and b) if memory (mind) needs to be used like a ram (temporary storage of information for constant adaptation to perceived inspiration; instead of like a hard-drive (accumulation of suggested information until capacity; while self restricting perceived inspiration)?
Intelligence
What if there's a difference between growing comprehension by adapting to perceived inspiration, and consenting to understand (stand under) the suggested information by others?
we already hear every day
What if form (life) within flow (inception towards death) represents temporary resistance (form) within ongoing velocity (flow), and therefore repeated choice of adaptation by resistance to velocity turns out to be the frequency needed to grow resistance within velocity?
What if the need to grow comprehension allows access to infinite perceivable inspiration; while the want for shortcuts corrupts the temporary status of those perceiving?
To choose want over need corrupts the resistance of life being moved from inception towards death, and less temporary resistance within ongoing movement implies a quicker access to outcome (death).
"free" will of choice represents the response to the "dom"inance of balance (free-dom) aka choice (sub) to balance (dom).
Perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) represents natural law; while choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) represents contract law in ignorance of natural law; also referred to as religion (from religio - to bind anew).
The only ones laughing their asses off are the ones you consent to submit your free will to. Question that.
i exercise my liberty assertively without reservation and only submit to God lmao thank you for continually educating people as whether they like it or not words are important lmao
Before the suggestible word comes the perceived sound. Those who consent to suggested (fiction) ignore perceived (reality). This is how the parasitic few control suggested narratives for the ignorant many consenting to them.
Instead of evaluating the suggested words as "important"; how about questioning "imported from where"? Could it be perceived sound?
my liberty
Libertas; from liber - "free". As in "free" will of choice in response to "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom. Free implies within dominance; hence in response to it. It ain't "my liberty" but being "at liberty as choice to balance".
only submit to God
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti. The "in nomine" (aka in the name of) represents your consent to their suggestion of "God"; hence being religion - "to bind anew" under choice (suggestion of religion) to choice (consent by faith) contract law.
Meanwhile under perceived natural law...if I go out and stand still, at what point do I need to consent to have faith in anything suggested? Will it happen after I'm forced by the natural order to respond to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter? Btw no words are spoken towards my perception when being dominated into the submission of adaptation.
educating people
Education under the umbrella of suggested scientism; implies once again choice (suggestion of information by teacher) to choice (consent to suggested information by student) contract law, which just so happens to led to "the clown world of scientism".
Meanwhile under natural law...to teach self implies to learn for self and vice versa. Others simply represent inspiration (need) or temptation (want) for choice within balance.
whether they like it or not
a) like vs not like represents the rebranded conflict of reason (want vs not want); which is caused by ignoring perceived balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want). This is how the few cause division (reason) by means of suggestion (-isms).
b) perception implies out of everything; your consent to suggestion is what causes you to ignore it for no; not; nothing; nothingness. Tell me...how does one perceive nothing? And if nature doesn't offer nothing towards our perception; then where did you get it from?
lmao
How does one process input from all without means of relief?
imagine typing this out then thinking got em lmao
Slurpaderpablackcock has been losing his mind lately and thinks we've all lost ours as well.
How can you win a war when your shills are hysterical?
i can tell lmao
first you spam the sub with schizo shitposts then you project in the comments lmao
what does what you just said have to do with you being an insecure schizo shitting all over /new? lmao forum sliding shill tactic right there lmao
It's obviously LOLOMGSTFU.
The only way to deal with this deranged faggot is to ignore this deranged faggot completely.
False dichotomy, both sides have a bunch of shill accounts.
Question a) if the parasitic few deliberately suggest information to fill up the memory of the many and b) if memory (mind) needs to be used like a ram (temporary storage of information for constant adaptation to perceived inspiration; instead of like a hard-drive (accumulation of suggested information until capacity; while self restricting perceived inspiration)?
What if there's a difference between growing comprehension by adapting to perceived inspiration, and consenting to understand (stand under) the suggested information by others?
What if form (life) within flow (inception towards death) represents temporary resistance (form) within ongoing velocity (flow), and therefore repeated choice of adaptation by resistance to velocity turns out to be the frequency needed to grow resistance within velocity?
What if the need to grow comprehension allows access to infinite perceivable inspiration; while the want for shortcuts corrupts the temporary status of those perceiving?
To choose want over need corrupts the resistance of life being moved from inception towards death, and less temporary resistance within ongoing movement implies a quicker access to outcome (death).
subscribe lmao
"free" will of choice represents the response to the "dom"inance of balance (free-dom) aka choice (sub) to balance (dom).
Perceived balance (offer) to choice (response) represents natural law; while choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) represents contract law in ignorance of natural law; also referred to as religion (from religio - to bind anew).
The only ones laughing their asses off are the ones you consent to submit your free will to. Question that.
i exercise my liberty assertively without reservation and only submit to God lmao thank you for continually educating people as whether they like it or not words are important lmao
Before the suggestible word comes the perceived sound. Those who consent to suggested (fiction) ignore perceived (reality). This is how the parasitic few control suggested narratives for the ignorant many consenting to them.
Instead of evaluating the suggested words as "important"; how about questioning "imported from where"? Could it be perceived sound?
Libertas; from liber - "free". As in "free" will of choice in response to "dom"inance of balance aka free-dom. Free implies within dominance; hence in response to it. It ain't "my liberty" but being "at liberty as choice to balance".
In nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti. The "in nomine" (aka in the name of) represents your consent to their suggestion of "God"; hence being religion - "to bind anew" under choice (suggestion of religion) to choice (consent by faith) contract law.
Meanwhile under perceived natural law...if I go out and stand still, at what point do I need to consent to have faith in anything suggested? Will it happen after I'm forced by the natural order to respond to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter? Btw no words are spoken towards my perception when being dominated into the submission of adaptation.
Education under the umbrella of suggested scientism; implies once again choice (suggestion of information by teacher) to choice (consent to suggested information by student) contract law, which just so happens to led to "the clown world of scientism".
Meanwhile under natural law...to teach self implies to learn for self and vice versa. Others simply represent inspiration (need) or temptation (want) for choice within balance.
a) like vs not like represents the rebranded conflict of reason (want vs not want); which is caused by ignoring perceived balance (need/want) for suggested imbalance (want vs not want). This is how the few cause division (reason) by means of suggestion (-isms).
b) perception implies out of everything; your consent to suggestion is what causes you to ignore it for no; not; nothing; nothingness. Tell me...how does one perceive nothing? And if nature doesn't offer nothing towards our perception; then where did you get it from?
How does one process input from all without means of relief?