You do serve an important purpose here. That's my belief.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why sharpen your teeth with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

But it waffles on it's own point, going back and forth between A and not A....as is the nature of words that de-fine or 'make a point' out of the whole. You and I. We.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Why choose the DE-fining, when REfining the spirit might work to better effect.

Refining by definiton here, as removing impurities.

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A.

If one, then two as not one, then three as observer of two. What would be four? Each as a new dimension............. And so on.

Learning to spell and the spirit behind.

It's a start.

You do serve an important purpose here. That's my belief.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why sharpen your teeth with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

But it waffles on it's own point, going back and forth between A and not A....as is the nature of words that de-fine or 'make a point' out of the whole. You and I. We.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Why chose the DE-fining, when REfining the spirit might work to better effect.

Refining by definiton here, as removing impurities.

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A.

If one, then two as not one, then three as observer of two. What would be four? Each as a new dimension............. And so on.

Learning to spell and the spirit behind.

It's a start.

You do serve an important purpose here. That's my belief.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why sharpen your teeth with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

But it waffles on it's own point, going back and forth between A and not A....as is the nature of words that de-fine or 'make a point' out of the whole. You and I. We.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Why chose the DE-fining, when REfining the spirit might work to better effect.

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A.

If one, then two as not one, then three as observer of two. What would be four? Each as a new dimension............. And so on.

Learning to spell and the spirit behind.

It's a start.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why sharpen your teeth with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

But it waffles on it's own point, going back and forth between A and not A....as is the nature of words that de-fine or 'make a point' out of the whole. You and I. We.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Why chose the DE-fining, when REfining the spirit might work to better effect.

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A.

If one, then two as not one, then three as observer of two. What would be four? Each as a new dimension............. And so on.

Learning to spell and the spirit behind.

It's a start.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why sharpen your teeth with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

But it waffles on it's own point, going back and forth between A and not A....as is the nature of words that de-fine or 'make a point' out of the whole. You and I. We.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Why chose the DE-fining, when REfining the spirit might work to better effect.

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A. If one, then two as not one, then three as observer. And so on.

It's a start.

But you, I and we need to use words, which both divide by defintion and unite by spirit. Don't we. You and I as seperate, yet identifying as we?

If the de-fining is moving away from the uniting spirit of words, then why obsess with that aspect of language?

a,b,c,d,e - that's five de-finings of one point, that's pretty 'sharp'.

Here's one: "How many angels can dance on the head of a pin?"

Try a different kind of exercise. If A, then not A. If one, then two as not one, then three as observer. And so on.

It's a start.