There are two types of people.

a) Here and there implies center within circumference aka partial within whole aka perception within perceivable aka one within oneness.

Try this...say "here" while pointing at "there"; then go over "there" and notice you'll be "here".

b) There cannot be a "two" of energy, since all implies one in energy. Only within energy (whole) can one add; subtract; divide and multiply potential (partials) from one another.

In other words...only within sameness (motion) can differences (matter) be shaped.

c) Type implies Latin typus (figure, image, form; kind) and Greek typos (impression)...being implies formed expression (life) within impressing flow (inception towards death).

Holding onto form tempts one to ignore flow...this is called idolatry aka type-casting. Me writing this down implies type-writing and spell-casting etc.

Each form is different from one another, while others suggest counting aka Latin computare (to reckon together one by one). Notice also that a computer utilize a binary (Latin binarius; consisting of two) called "0/1"...so where's the 2 in 0 and 1? It's ones (1) consent to the suggested offer (0) by another one (1); which binds 1 + 1 together into 2 aka dualism.

d) People implies each consenting singular (person) within a suggested pluralism (people)...that's a combination of consent and suggestion. Before that...person implies per sonos (by sound) aka a setting apart of sound and each one by sound.

These are the ones meaning to combine.

a) Suggested the-ism combines ones consent with a suggested authority by another.

b) Meaning (having in mind) implies suggested information by another, held consensual within ones mind/memory, while ignoring that perceivable inspiration cannot be held onto.

Few utilize consent of many to combine suggested information within memory, as to establish indigestion of matter within the procession of motion.

The platonists(perceptionists) and the Aristotelians(conceptualists)

a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism by another aka a combination.

b) Combining one consent with suggested perception-ism contradicts that all perceivable sets itself apart into each ones perception.

c) Perceivable reveals; suggested conceals....if one consents to it.

d) Plato aka plat (to spread) implies from whole (perceivable) into partials (perception)...not from partial (suggestion) to partial (consent), while ignoring whole.

Motion spreads matter; matter is tempted to hold onto each other; which spreads dis-ease. Example...a mother holding onto a child implies smothering aka suffocation...so does holding onto any suggested information within self.

e) Aristo aka Greek aristos (ar; to fit together) tempts one to ignore being apart from one another, while partial within whole.

Plato (to spread apart) + Aristotle (to fit together) contradict each other to manipulate the ones who choose to hold onto a side. This is called talmudic reasoning (contradiction of both sides within reason) utilizing allegorical deceit.

Underneath that operates nature aka spreading apart (inception) and fitting together (death) aka the momentum (inception towards death) of motion for matter (life) within. In nature there's no conflict between plato (to spread apart aka inception) and aristotle (to fit together aka death)...only ones life (choice) in-between (balance).

In short...to conceal (suggestion) what nature reveals (perception) aka the "great work" of the enlightened few among the profane many.

f) Concept implies con (together; with) capere (to take)...an inversion of incept (inception) aka being (life) within that which gives and takes (inception towards death).

There are two types of people.

a) Here and there implies center within circumference aka partial within whole aka perception within perceivable aka one within oneness.

Try this...say "here" while pointing at "there"; then go over "there" and notice you'll be "here".

b) There cannot be a "two" of energy, since all implies one in energy. Only within energy (whole) can one add; subtract; divide and multiply potential (partials) from one another.

In other words...only within sameness (motion) can differences (matter) be shaped.

c) Type implies Latin typus (figure, image, form; kind) and Greek typos (impression)...being implies formed expression (life) within impressing flow (inception towards death).

Holding onto form tempts one to ignore flow...this is called idolatry aka type-casting. Me writing this down implies type-writing and spell-casting etc.

Each form is different from one another, while others suggest counting aka Latin computare (to reckon together one by one). Notice also that a computer utilize a binary (Latin binarius; consisting of two) called "0/1"...so where's the 2 in 0 and 1? It's ones (1) consent to the suggested offer (0) by another one (1); which binds 1 + 1 together into 2 aka dualism.

d) People implies each consenting singular (person) within a suggested pluralism (people)...that's a combination of consent and suggestion. Before that...person implies per sonos (by sound) aka a setting apart of sound and each one by sound.

These are the ones meaning to combine.

a) Suggested the-ism combines ones consent with a suggested authority by another.

b) Meaning (having in mind) implies suggested information by another, held consensual within ones mind/memory, while ignoring that perceivable inspiration cannot be held onto.

Few utilize consent of many to combine suggested information within memory, as to establish indigestion of matter within the procession of motion.

The platonists(perceptionists) and the Aristotelians(conceptualists)

a) -ist implies ones consent to a suggested -ism by another aka a combination.

b) Combining one consent with suggested perception-ism contradicts that all perceivable sets itself apart into each ones perception.

c) Perceivable reveals; suggested conceals....if one consents to it.

d) Plato aka plat (to spread) implies from whole (perceivable) into partials (perception)...not from partial (suggestion) to partial (consent), while ignoring whole.

Motion spreads matter; matter is tempted to hold onto each other; which spreads dis-ease. Example...a mother holding onto a child implies smothering aka suffocation...so does holding onto any suggested information within self.

e) Aristo aka Greek aristos (ar; to fit together) tempts one to ignore being apart from one another, while partial within whole.

Plato (to spread apart) + Aristotle (to fit together) contradict each other to manipulate the ones who choose to hold onto a side. This is called talmudic reasoning (contradiction of both sides within reason) utilizing allegorical deceit.

Underneath that operates nature aka spreading apart (inception) and fitting together (death) aka the momentum (inception towards death) of motion for matter (life) within. In nature there's no conflict between plato (to spread apart aka inception) and aristotle (to fit together aka death)...only ones life (choice) in-between (balance).

In short...to conceal (suggestion) what nature reveals (perception) aka the "great work" of the enlightened few among the profane many.

f) Concept implies con (together; with) caper (to take)...an inversion of incept (inception) aka being (life) within that which gives and takes (inception towards death).