explain why you do what you do
a) EX (expression of life) within the PLAIN (inception towards death) of existence...what else is there and why would one ignore it?
b) not doing...being done by (process of dying) while struggling to redo self (living).
Is it OCD?
a) suggested "obsessive-compulsive disorder" tempts one to ignore perceivable...being compelled (driving force) by the natural order (inception toward death), while struggling to resist it (life).
b) OBSESS', verb - "to besiege; blocking up; occupy"...the temporary living cannot besiege, block or occupy the ongoing process of dying. Others can suggest one to obsess over trying it tho...
c) would you call adaptation to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter "compulsive" behavior, since life keeps responding to it from inception until death?
d) what if temporary chaos (living) within the ongoing natural order (process of dying) can be suggested to -DIS (dismiss; divide from) aka to ignore the growth of self discernment?
Are you a heavy user of psychoactive drugs?
a)I don't even drink alcohol, and the last time I dabbled with drugs was decades ago, during my teen years. A mind under the influence was never my thing.
b) how could PSYCHO (Greek psykhē) - "soul; spirit; mind" be inactive when it implies adaptation to being moved? Even an ignored psyche exist in response to constant activity.
c) living implies being used by the process of dying, hence only able to RE (respond to) USE (being used by).
my initial suspicion that you were a bot
a) who suggested you to dehumanize others as "bots" and who benefits from you casting suspicion among others?
b) what if both temptations could be avoided by comprehending that only the process of dying "initiates" everything living within? Inception represents ones initiation into life. One cannot initiate...one represents the initiated reaction, hence having free will of choice.
c) your consent to suggested "bot" shapes everyone else into a suspect of being or not being a bot...your choice represents the issue, not what others are or aren't. Others ruthlessly exploit your choice with suggestions.
d) BOT; from ROBOT (Latin roboro, from robur, strength)...why would the few suggest the many to dehumanize each other with the term "bot", when it implies strength? Could it be that resisting the suggested temptations by others represents ones strength?
there are enough random errors
a) call them out. If it's grammar related...I'm a lazy cunt, so whatever you throw at me, I most likely already caught myself stubbornly ignoring before. Anything else helps me comprehend more about both perspectives (writer/reader), so by all means...
b) ER'ROR, noun [Latin error from erro, to wander.], while being moved from inception towards death, life can either follow along or choose to wander. The latter implies the need to resist wanting the former.
Also; consider the relation between ERROR (to wander) and SPACE (Latin spatium, spatior, to wander)...
c) RAN'DOM, noun - "course without direction"...how could a vessel (life) in motion (inception towards death) be on course without direction?
Consider if RAN (running fast aka velocity) generates DOM (dominance aka the momentum of motion for those within)? What exists within the momentum of velocity (process of dying)...resistance (living).
unique
There ya go...UNI (Latin unus; one) aka the one within all, the choice within balance; the form within flow; the partial within whole; the perceiving within perceivable; the potential within potentiality; the resistance within velocity, the living within the process of dying...a unique experience.
Now ask yourself why the many (plural) are following the suggested orders of the few chosen ones (singular)? Why does unique stand out from the norm? Why are perceivable differences viewed as threats to suggested sameness?
style
STYLE; noun (from Teutonic stellen; to set or place)...does life being set into the process of dying represent "sameness" or "difference"?
Dare I say that the status quo represents ones style...even when ignored?
I think you are a human
HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form, species.] + AN'IMAL, noun [Latin anima, air, breath, soul.]...hence animated (inception towards death) form (life).
monomaniacally
a) MONO (one) PHONIC (within sound), hence representing an IN (within) SANUS (sound) PER (by) SONOS (sound).
Ask yourself who suggests you mono; stereo; dolby and surround sound as distractions from the aforementioned?
b) MANIA; from root MENTIS; MENS - "mind; to think"
"In the real time world no one sees her at all...They all say she's crazy"
"All the while you're stuck between...What's will and what will be"
"On the ice filled line of sanity...It's a place most never see"
"It's a hard won place of mystery...You can touch it but can't hold it"
"Changing moment into light...She has danced into the danger zone"
"She's a maniac; maniac on the floor"
Try using your mind to think about the implications of that...
What is your goal, though?
"...we will still direct thought towards different fantastic theories which will appear to be progressive. For it was by the word "progressive" that we have successfully turned the brains of the stupid Goys. There are no brains among the Goys to realize that this word is but a cover for digression...progress, being a false conception, serves to conceal the truth so that nobody may know it except ourselves; God's elect; who are its guardians."
~Protocol 13
Why do you perceive the world as outcome oriented (towards suggested goals), when life can only move towards death? What if I adapt to perceivable origin instead of chasing after suggested goals like the majority willingly does?
What if one can gain access to more and more of everything perceivable; if one chooses to resist the temptation of wanting to reach and hold onto what others are suggesting?
If soccer is about goals...why are they keep playing after winning? How many gamblers stop once they win, and in that regard...why does the house always wins?
Why would choice require goals (want), when its foundation represents balance (need)?
Let me finish with Occam's Razor...if the world surrounding self becomes too complex (suggested information), could it be that oneself chooses to ignore the simplicity of it (perceivable inspiration)?
explain why you do what you do
a) EX (expression of life) within the PLAIN (inception towards death) of existence...what else is there and why would one ignore it?
b) not doing...being done by (process of dying) while struggling to redo self (living).
Is it OCD?
a) suggested "obsessive-compulsive disorder" tempts one to ignore perceivable...being compelled (driving force) by the natural order (inception toward death), while struggling to resist it (life).
b) OBSESS', verb - "to besiege; blocking up; occupy"...the temporary living cannot besiege, block or occupy the ongoing process of dying. Others can suggest one to obsess over trying it tho...
c) would you call adaptation to breathing; thirst; hunger and lack of shelter "compulsive" behavior, since life responses to it from inception until death?
d) what if temporary chaos (living) within the ongoing natural order (process of dying) can be suggested to -DIS (dismiss; divide from) aka to ignore the growth of self discernment?
Are you a heavy user of psychoactive drugs?
a)I don't even drink alcohol, and the last time I dabbled with drugs was decades ago, during my teen years. A mind under the influence was never my thing.
b) how could PSYCHO (Greek psykhē) - "soul; spirit; mind" be inactive when it implies adaptation to being moved? Even an ignored psyche exist in response to constant activity.
c) living implies being used by the process of dying, hence only able to RE (respond to) USE (being used by).
my initial suspicion that you were a bot
a) who suggested you to dehumanize others as "bots" and who benefits from you casting suspicion among others?
b) what if both temptations could be avoided by comprehending that only the process of dying "initiates" everything living within? Inception represents ones initiation into life. One cannot initiate...one represents the initiated reaction, hence having free will of choice.
c) your consent to suggested "bot" shapes everyone else into a suspect of being or not being a bot...your choice represents the issue, not what others are or aren't. Others ruthlessly exploit your choice with suggestions.
d) BOT; from ROBOT (Latin roboro, from robur, strength)...why would the few suggest the many to dehumanize each other with the term "bot", when it implies strength? Could it be that resisting the suggested temptations by others represents ones strength?
there are enough random errors
a) call them out. If it's grammar related...I'm a lazy cunt, so whatever you throw at me, I most likely already caught myself stubbornly ignoring before. Anything else helps me comprehend more about both perspectives (writer/reader), so by all means...
b) ER'ROR, noun [Latin error from erro, to wander.], while being moved from inception towards death, life can either follow along or choose to wander. The latter implies the need to resist wanting the former.
Also; consider the relation between ERROR (to wander) and SPACE (Latin spatium, spatior, to wander)...
c) RAN'DOM, noun - "course without direction"...how could a vessel (life) in motion (inception towards death) be on course without direction?
Consider if RAN (running fast aka velocity) generates DOM (dominance aka the momentum of motion for those within)? What exists within the momentum of velocity (process of dying)...resistance (living).
unique
There ya go...UNI (Latin unus; one) aka the one within all, the choice within balance; the form within flow; the partial within whole; the perceiving within perceivable; the potential within potentiality; the resistance within velocity, the living within the process of dying...a unique experience.
Now ask yourself why the many (plural) are following the suggested orders of the few chosen ones (singular)? Why does unique stand out from the norm? Why are perceivable differences viewed as threats to suggested sameness?
style
STYLE; noun (from Teutonic stellen; to set or place)...does life being set into the process of dying represent "sameness" or "difference"?
Dare I say that the status quo represents ones style...even when ignored?
I think you are a human
HU'MAN, adjective [Latin humanus; Heb. form, species.] + AN'IMAL, noun [Latin anima, air, breath, soul.]...hence animated (inception towards death) form (life).
monomaniacally
a) MONO (one) PHONIC (within sound), hence representing an IN (within) SANUS (sound) PER (by) SONOS (sound).
Ask yourself who suggests you mono; stereo; dolby and surround sound as distractions from the aforementioned?
b) MANIA; from root MENTIS; MENS - "mind; to think"
"In the real time world no one sees her at all...They all say she's crazy"
"All the while you're stuck between...What's will and what will be"
"On the ice filled line of sanity...It's a place most never see"
"It's a hard won place of mystery...You can touch it but can't hold it"
"Changing moment into light...She has danced into the danger zone"
"She's a maniac; maniac on the floor"
Try using your mind to think about the implications of that...
What is your goal, though?
"...we will still direct thought towards different fantastic theories which will appear to be progressive. For it was by the word "progressive" that we have successfully turned the brains of the stupid Goys. There are no brains among the Goys to realize that this word is but a cover for digression...progress, being a false conception, serves to conceal the truth so that nobody may know it except ourselves; God's elect; who are its guardians."
~Protocol 13
Why do you perceive the world as outcome oriented (towards suggested goals), when life can only move towards death? What if I adapt to perceivable origin instead of chasing after suggested goals like the majority willingly does?
What if one can gain access to more and more of everything perceivable; if one chooses to resist the temptation of wanting to reach and hold onto what others are suggesting?
If soccer is about goals...why are they keep playing after winning? How many gamblers stop once they win, and in that regard...why does the house always wins?
Why would choice require goals (want), when its foundation represents balance (need)?
Let me finish with Occam's Razor...if the world surrounding self becomes too complex (suggested information), could it be that oneself chooses to ignore the simplicity of it (perceivable inspiration)?