Only one way (inception towards death) makes ones (life) possible.
to have peace...
...implies one consent to oppose war within a conflict. Choosing peace (want) over war (not want) or war (want) over peace (not want) implies the same conflict from a different side.
One exists in-between need/want (balance)...ignoring this puts one into want vs not want (imbalance). Choice ignoring balance imbalances choice.
...ism should be the norm.
The few suggest norms as a standard (a position in battle to serve as a rallying point for a military force) for the conflicts of reason among the many.
Nature represents an ongoing order; setting those within free to choose how to react, which represents a chaotic state of being...others suggest -isms to tempt one to behave according to norms; to standards; to rules of behavior; to moralism; uniformity etc.
The few suggest the many to consent by "free" will of choice to "bind" themselves to norms.
You don't mix...
Being implies partial within whole, hence the natural order (action) setting itself apart into chaotic choices (reaction)...from same into difference; both in balance with each other.
Others suggest mixing aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka abrahamism (father of multitude) aka tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) aka equality through diversity aka uniformity; unicode; university; universal serial bus; universal pictures; universal studios; united states; united nations; european union; unicef aka migration; miscegenation; melting pot and so on...
Ones consent to the suggestions by others implies oneself binding self to others, hence mixing. Self discernment has to be grown by self; hence apart from others, not together.
The suggested word "together" implies "towards getting", which tempts life to ignore being moved towards death. Towards implies within loss...not towards getting.
so contradictory to each other
Before one can contradict each other; one exists apart from one another...this one ignores when reasoning about suggested contradictions.
known since Aristotle.
Knowledge implies perceivable (inspiration); aristotelianism represents suggested (information)....consenting to suggested tempts one to ignore perceivable.
Only one way (inception towards death) makes ones (life) possible.
...implies one consent to oppose war within a conflict. Choosing peace (want) over war (not want) or war (want) over peace (not want) implies the same conflict from a different side.
One exists in-between need/want (balance)...ignoring this puts one into want vs not want (imbalance). Choice ignoring balance imbalances choice.
The few suggest norms as a standard (a position in battle to serve as a rallying point for a military force) for the conflicts of reason among the many.
Nature represents an ongoing order; setting those within free to choose how to react, which represents a chaotic state of being...others suggest -isms to tempt one to behave according to norms; to standards; to rules of behavior; to moralism; uniformity etc.
The few suggest the many to consent by "free" will of choice to "bind" themselves to norms.
Being implies partial within whole, hence the natural order (action) setting itself apart into chaotic choices (reaction)...from same into difference; both in balance with each other.
Others suggest mixing aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one) aka abrahamism (father of multitude) aka tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together) aka equality through diversity aka uniformity; unicode; university; universal serial bus; universal pictures; universal studios; united states; united nations; european union; unicef aka migration; miscegenation; melting pot and so on...
Ones consent to the suggestions by others implies oneself binding self to others, hence mixing. Self discernment has to be grown by self; hence apart from others, not together.
The suggested word "together" implies "towards getting", which tempts life to ignore being moved towards death. Towards implies within loss...not towards getting.
Before one can contradict each other; one exists apart from one another...this one ignores when reasoning about suggested contradictions.
Knowledge implies perceivable (inspiration); aristotelianism represents suggested (information)....consenting to suggested tempts one to ignore perceivable.