I said all of us, as a whole. and i am part of that "we"
a) perceivable whole implies more than any suggested "us".
b) part of suggested tempts one to ignore being partial within perceivable whole, while giving those suggesting the power to define; redefine and contradict what "all; whole; us etc." means.
c) why is it that a few can control a consenting many by suggesting "we the people"; yet among the many one can suggest "we must do something" without getting anywhere?
in who's property are we tenants?
a) PROP'ER, adjective (Latin proprius) - "peculiar; naturally or essentially belonging to a person"...belong implies being short essence (life) within long abstract (inception towards death).
Others suggest belonging to mean "appended; holding onto", which tempts one to ignore that abstract (ongoing) generates essence (temporary) through motion. Essence holding onto implies ignorance of abstract, hence lack of self discernment.
Try holding onto your breath and wait for abstract to teach essence a lesson.
b) TEN'ANT, noun - "one who has possession of any place; a dweller; permanent resident"...being implies temporary resident (life) within possession of continuance (inception towards death).
Loss posses growth; growth resists temptation of loss to sustain self.
c) only within whole can there be partials (who). Who refers to persons; while person implies per sonos (by sound), hence being partial within SOUND, adjective (Latin sanus) - "entire; whole".
can we grow to be more, are we more or less than we could be?
a) nature offers infinite loss (inception towards death) towards finite growth (life). The limit to ones growth implies self; hence perpetuation of self implying intercourse with another for off-spring.
b) more (want) vs less (not want) tempts one to ignore being growth (need) within loss (want). Growing implies resisting loss; while loss tempts one to ignore resisting.
Sleight of hand: path (inception towards death) of least resistance (life).
c) being (alive) implies within origin (process of dying)...others suggest "could" and "should" to tempt one to ignore that.
how did humans originally get here
HU'MAN, adjective (Heb. form, species)
AN'IMAL, noun (Latin anima, air, breath, soul)
a) Flow (inception towards death) generates form (life) aka animation specifies human aka whole generates partials.
Others suggest "human" and "animal" to distract one from discerning to be animated (animal) form (human).
b) origin of flow/form implies ENERGY (Greek; work) - "internal/inherent power".
not how each person got here
a) person (per sonos; by sound) implies being (instrument) within everything (sound)...others suggest nihilism (not) to tempt one to ignore that.
b) the opposite of "each" isn't "neither", but whole; entire; all; sound; energy.
a) perceivable whole implies more than any suggested "us".
b) part of suggested tempts one to ignore being partial within perceivable whole, while giving those suggesting the power to define; redefine and contradict what "all; whole; us etc." means.
c) why is it that a few can control a consenting many by suggesting "we the people"; yet among the many one can suggest "we must do something" without getting anywhere?
a) PROP'ER, adjective (Latin proprius) - "peculiar; naturally or essentially belonging to a person"...belong implies being short essence (life) within long abstract (inception towards death).
Others suggest belonging to mean "appended; holding onto", which tempts one to ignore that abstract (ongoing) generates essence (temporary) through motion. Essence holding onto implies ignorance of abstract, hence lack of self discernment.
Try holding onto your breath and wait for abstract to teach essence a lesson.
b) TEN'ANT, noun - "one who has possession of any place; a dweller; permanent resident"...being implies temporary resident (life) within possession of continuance (inception towards death).
Loss posses growth; growth resists temptation of loss to sustain self.
c) only within whole can there be partials (who). Who refers to persons; while person implies per sonos (by sound), hence being partial within SOUND, adjective (Latin sanus) - "entire; whole".
a) nature offers infinite loss (inception towards death) towards finite growth (life). The limit to ones growth implies self; hence perpetuation of self implying intercourse with another for off-spring.
b) more (want) vs less (not want) tempts one to ignore being growth (need) within loss (want). Growing implies resisting loss; while loss tempts one to ignore resisting.
Sleight of hand: path (inception towards death) of least resistance (life).
c) being (alive) implies within origin (process of dying)...others suggest "could" and "should" to tempt one to ignore that.
a) Flow (inception towards death) generates form (life) aka animation specifies human aka whole generates partials.
Others suggest "human" and "animal" to distract one from discerning to be animated (animal) form (human).
b) origin of flow/form implies ENERGY (Greek; work) - "internal/inherent power".
a) person (per sonos; by sound) implies being (instrument) within everything (sound)...others suggest nihilism (not) to tempt one to ignore that.
b) the opposite of "each" isn't "neither", but whole; entire; all; sound; energy.