Consolidation for services rendered... https://pic8.co/sh/ivJ3rz.jpg
Consensus fiction within resistance reality...the perceivable natural order needs to be resisted, while suggested orders tempt one to want to follow.
on a long enough timeline, the survival rate for everyone drops to zero
a) each one represents TIME, noun [Latin tempus; tempora) aka the temporary (living) within the ongoing line (process of dying).
b) suggested SURVI'VE, verb - "to remain alive" contradicts being alive; which implies being moved from inception towards death, hence the struggle to sustain being alive.
c) suggested zero tempts each perceiving one (living) to ignore perceivable oneness (process of dying).
d) RATE, noun [Latin ratus, reor, contracted from retor, redor, or resor; ratio and reason.] - "the proportion or standard by which quantity or value is adjusted".
Perceivable value (process of dying) cannot be adjusted...perceiving evaluation (living) needs to constantly adjust self by adapting to perceivable value.
lemmings
a) gerbils don't jump from cliffs...(((rats))) throw them to sell narratives.
b) LEM'MING, noun [Latin lemniscus, a ribbon.] - "a curve in the form of the figure 8" aka infinity (process of dying) from the perspective of the finite (living)...ignoring that represents "suicide"...
a) ya no más "anal stuff"; Hermano...
b) ANAL'YSIS, noun - "the separation of a compound body into its constituent parts"...that already happened, yet as the opposite...from essential whole (process of dying) into each substantial partial (living).
a) because consenting to 'in nomine patris et filii et spiritus sancti' implies ones submission to anyone suggesting "in the name of" authority...that's the master (lord) the many follow.
b) the few suggest "do not" to tempt the many to ignore being (living) done by everything (process of dying), hence having the free will of choice to RE (respond to) DO (being done by) aka to sustain self temporarily within ongoing.
oldest counting systems
a) COUNT, verb - "to number; to tell or name one by one"...the foundation for counting implies ones choice to count other ones.
b) to be implies a unit (partial) within a system (whole).
c) each partial within a whole represents one; while the whole represents oneness.
d) the base of each one (living) implies oneness (process of dying).
e) one (perceiving) within oneness (perceivable) can be tempted to ignore oneself for suggested dualism aka TWO, adjective [Latin duo] - "one and one".
f) nature sets itself apart aka from whole (perceivable) into each partial (perceiving), partials can suggest each other the inversion of apartheid...togetherness aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one); tikkun olam (healing the world by bringing together), equality (same) through diversity (different); united nations; united states; european union; uniformity, migration (one into another one) etc.
Suggestions to tempt consent (want or not want) as to gain control over reasoning (want vs not want). Without consent given, suggestions remain impotent temptations.
I understand...levels of understanding.
Balance represents the level (even); choice represents the odds...understanding represents ones choice to stand under the suggested choices of others, hence imbalance.
the difference between
Being in-between (inception to death) implies being differentiated (living) through sameness (process of dying). Willingly ignoring this gives others the consent to utilize suggested superstition, numerology, semantics and gematria.
Crowley was a fine example of how such forays can lead to madness...
...according to those suggesting his-story.
can lead to madness
MAD, adjective - "disordered in intellect"...a) INTELLECT (Latin intelligo) - "to understand" represents standing under suggested, hence ignoring to resist the perceivable natural order, and disorder represents temporary chaos (living) to willingly ignore ongoing order (process of dying).
The few suggest intellect; intelligence; intel...to tempt the consenting many to disorder themselves by standing under suggested information.
To be (alive) implies being lead into (inception) and out of (death) temporary chaos through the ongoing natural order...so everything leads everyone back to order.
the infinite complexity that unfolds
Chasing suggested information into complexity grinds ones resistance down, hence the more complex the suggested, the dumber those consenting to it, which leads to the suggested crumbling upon them based on lack of potential to utilize or maintain it.
The few suggest "civilizations; nations, and societies" as narratives to distract the many from the suggested collapsing upon them, based on their consent to want more of it. From building the tower of babel (confusion; disorder) to fallen angles (consequences of ignorant choices cascading down the pyramid).
Seeking, one can find...
...because living implies being directed towards death, hence seeking wanted outcomes representing less needed resistance, hence "finding" faster.
one can find most any conjecture confirmed
CONJECTURE, noun - "casting or throwing together"...every suggested information represents conjecture, because it implies choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law, hence casting a bond between choices together.
Meanwhile; everything perceivable represents moving differences (inspiration) aka different partials being moved apart from one another.
a God complex in control
a) the few suggest control from above to tempt the many to ignore being free (choice) at the center (balance).
b) suggested composition (more than one) tempts perceiving ones (partial) to ignore perceivable oneness (whole).
c) consenting to suggested represents ignorance of being choice for submission to other choices. To distract from the contract law underneath, the few suggest control from above "in the name of", hence "e nomine"...patris (whole) et filii (partial) et spiritus sancti (adaptation of partial to whole).
I've developed a quip 'They aren't wrong'.
a) sarcasm is being suggested to distract comedy (living) from drama (process of dying).
b) are vs aren't and right vs wrong represents reasoning over suggested, hence implying ones consent to suggested (want) over perceivable (need).
c) those comprehending reasoning utilize contradiction of whatever you suggest within a conflict of reason, as to keep you reasoning, while those lacking comprehension will either fortify their side within reason with whatever you suggested or demand you to choose a side instead of questioning theirs.
100 people will see something different in any one 'clue'.
a) because everyone within everything represents a different point of view.
b) Who? One! Which weapon? Choice! Where? Balance! One doesn't need suggested clues to solve anything, one needs to resist be dissolved by everything. The solution isn't hidden; those being dissolved by it, need to grow within it.
navigate the labyrinth
LAB, noun - "a great talker; a blabber"...hence without consenting to blabbering suggestions; the only perceivable path won't turn into a mental labyrinth of confusion.
Daedelus fashioned wings for his son so he could fly OVER the whole grid
Assistance for growth tempts ignorance of growing resistance within temptation. Hence the choice to accept (want) vs decline (not want) the suggested wings, or the need to learn to fly.
As for over the whole grid...no matter ones height, there can only be partials as far as the eye can see.
too close to the sun
Both "sun" and "son" represent one...not the material, but partial (material) within whole (immaterial). Too close to oneself represents ignoring perceivable outside (exoteric) for suggested upheld within (esoteric)...leading nonetheless to getting burned.
first step towards escape
a)each choice represents another first step within momentum. Each step shapes ones surrounding within everyone's path.
b) suggested escapism tempts towards outcome (dying), while ignoring the perceivable need to resist origin for prolonged sustenance (living).
He had knowledge of the minotaur first and that was all the difference.
Everyone has knowledge (the ability to perceive everything perceivable)..."minotaur" represents a suggested information tempting one to ignore perceivable inspiration (moving differences).
Forest for the trees is the modern analogy.
a) suggesting that a forest is based upon amount of trees, when everything (loss) surrounding a forest (growth) is implied for the existence of the forest (Latin foris) - "outside".
b) ANAL'OGY, noun [Gr. ratio, proportion.] - "an agreement or likeness between things, when the things are otherwise entirely different"...each thing within everything represents a difference (a partial within whole). The agreement represents choice (suggestion) towards choice (consent) contract law...a temptation.
How and why were specific letters formed and chosen and united to form words?
a) How? Free will of choice. Why? To tempt others to submit free will of choice to suggested, which allows those suggesting to define; redefine and contradict the suggested at their free will of choice.
b) LET'TER, noun [from let.] - "one who permits", hence choice (consent) permitting choice (suggestion) to contractually bind ones choice to suggested choices, hence from being free to being set free/let off the leash at liberty by others.
PERMIT', verb [Latin permitto; per and mitto, to send.]...the process of dying sends those living within, hence balance sending choice. The few suggest POST, noun [Latin postis, positus, pono, to place.] for the many to send letters...
c) suggested UNITED; U'NIT, noun [Latin unus, unitas, unity] - "one" tempts the perceiving one (partial) to ignore perceivable oneness (whole) for suggested togetherness with other ones.
d) a letter represents suggested symbolism (meaning attached to brand), which represents the inversion of perceivable symmetry (form within flow aka moving differences aka inspiration for adaptation as to draw comprehension from).
Setting the former (symbolism) into the latter (symmetry) contradicts the temporary form with ongoing flow. This brings one to WORD, noun [Latin , to speak; that which is uttered or thrown out.] - "a combination of articulate and vocal sounds". Now one can artificially (by suggestion) combine uttered meanings, hence mimicking ongoing change. This allows those who suggest information to adapt to those who consent to ignore inspiration.
Spirit of the law vs letter of the law.
L-A-W aka Land Air Water...constituent parts (partial form) within a composition (whole flow).
SPIR'IT, noun [Latin spiritus, from spiro, to breathe, to blow. The primary sense is to rush or drive.] - "animal exitement" aka mind agitated through animation. That implies the need to adapt as the exited (living) to the animating (process of dying), while the suggested letter represents permission by others on how to react.
Meaning is spirit not letter.
Perceivable inspiration represents predefined meaning, suggesting others what "is" tempts one to ignore predefined meaning (all that was perceivable before one can shape a suggestion about what is), while tempting others to exploit ignorance with suggested meaning.
Letter divides, spirit unites
a) consenting (want or not want) to suggested letters shapes division (want vs not want).
b) all represents one (unit) in energy...the more the perceiving one adapts (spirit) to perceivable oneness, the more one comprehends oneness, hence being alone aka ALL(in)ONE.
c) the few suggest togetherness (e pluribus unum; tikkun olam; equality through diversity etc.) under the umbrella of "unity" to tempt each one of the many to ignore being apartheid (living) within wholeness (process of dying), hence struggling to sustain apartheid before being dissolved back into wholeness.
Spirit precedes words
a) sound (perceivable) precedes words (suggested); spirit represents each ones choice of resonance (need) or dissonance (want) within sound.
b) the few suggest spiritualism (opposing materialism) to tempt each one of the many to ignore that spirit represents ones adaptation as material (form) to being (choice) within the momentum (balance) of immaterial (flow).
to understand the spirit behind becomes the SHIELD against deception through words.
a) consenting to understand (stand under) suggested spiritualism shapes the "against" conflict of reason (want vs not want aka spiritualism vs materialism aka agreement vs disagreement).
b) a suggested SHIELD, verb - "to defend against" tempts one to grow resistance "for" the sustenance of self (living) within harms way (process of dying) aka growth within loss, not growth vs growth to avoid loss aka seeking order out of chaos. The conflicts of reason simply tempt resistance to be spend against resistance, while both sides fall for the temptation to ignore resisting temptations, which would grow resistance exponentially.
c) both attack and defense represent tools of free will of choice, yet choice represents the response-ability within balance. Choose to attack or defend whatever you want or not want; but you need to adapt to balance.
A fish can describe the ocean all day and die of thirst.
Discerned to be a fish; grown comprehension about the ocean...yet failed to adapt as the former to the momentum of the latter.
it's not I
INTEL'LIGENCE, noun (Latin intelligentia, from intelligo, to understand)...your consent to suggested "you.com chat bot" implies those suggesting to utilize your consent to "stand under" them and what they're suggesting.
Your consent represents the EF'FORT, noun [Latin fortis. See Force) - "a straining; an exertion of strength", those suggesting are harvesting within artificial intelligence, which is being utilized against all those putting in less effort.
If I'm accused of being anti-semite, I would say, 'Bring me this Semite'.
a) that represents your choice to prolong giving consent to the pro vs anti -semite conflict of reason.
b) pro vs anti represents a rebranding of want vs not want aka agreement vs disagreement over suggested information, while tempting one to ignore the "need" to adapt to perceivable inspiration.
c) the issue...your consent to suggested SEMITE; noun "a jew, Arab, Assyrian, or Aramaean", hence your consent to the suggestion of those now tempting further consent to reasoning (pro vs anti) about it.
Checking the etymology brings one closer to the, as of now ignored, perceivable inspiration...SEM'I, (Latin semi) - "in composition, signifies half" + SE - "apart, away", which implies the partial (living) as half of whole (process of dying).
It's on oneself to discern between "semite" as a suggested brand, or "semi, se" as a perceivable composition (moving partial within whole). Nature doesn't brand anything a semite; it does move partials within whole tho...
And I might be seen as anti-semantic if I say, 'Show me this 'will'.'
a) suggesting SEMANTIC (to signify meaning) tempts others to ignore perceivable, predefined ME'ANING - "having in mind". Whatever each partial has in mind, implies the whole already containing it, hence supplying it towards minds for thinking.
Tempting others with suggested meaning represents...a MEAN (low minded) choice.
b) to say represents uttering suggestible words towards the free "will" of choice by others. Therefore...you already directed towards the will of others; and any response represents the will of others.
In other words...to suggest makes you the director of a show based on will, while casting the will of others as (re)actors into your SHOW, verb - "to exhibit or present to the view of others"...a suggested show called ignorance of perceivable (most watched show among the many btw).
Is there a middle? A tourus vector? :)
a) each ones choice represents the middle of balance, the choices of others tempt one to imbalance self, and balance (momentum) represents the middle of motion.
b) comprehension represents the tower (tourus), hence representing the height of grown comprehension towering over the valley of ignorance among others, and life itself represents the passenger (vector) within the process of dying.
The Will as ego projection is what most discuss when the subject is breached.
An ego (memory filled with consented to information, as suggested by others) can only be shaped by ones free "will" of choice. Meanwhile, temporary living represents the projectile, forwarded through the ongoing process of dying...hence being a subject (form) within objectifying (flow). Forming an ego by consenting to the suggestion of others, represents further subjection under others.
Most discussions ignore perceivable "free will of choice" for suggested "free will", hence a) lacking choice, which implies b) lacking self discernment about being choice (reaction) within balance (enacting). Therefore, the momentum (balance) of motion projects each ones free will of choice as the internal reaction at the center of it.
Only by discerning balance to choice, can one further discern need (balance) and want/will (choice), because they imply each others coexistence within motion.
You seem to critique this. As do I.
CRITIC, noun (Gr., a judge or discerner, to judge, to separate, to distinguish)...a discerning mind (discernment) represents the separated; distinguished reaction within enacting justice aka that which "just is" (the whole flow for each partial form within).
Everyone represents indeed "a critic", but as a separate and distinguished, partial discerning mind within perceivable...not as the judge over the suggestions by others.
You have meditated on the subject
ME'DIATE, adjective [Latin medius, middle.]...as choice one represents the mediating subject within the medium (balance/momentum) of objectifying motion. What I mostly did was resisting the temptation to ignore this by subjecting myself to consent; believe or reason about what others are suggesting me about the perceivable world.
Less noise (samsara)...more sound-minded.
'If the map is not the terrain, then what 'is' the terrain?
All that was before one can choose to react within, while being moved by it. Balance represents the terrain of choice, while choice represents the center of the terrain, with the temporary opportunity to map out (consciously perceiving) uncharted (lack of comprehension) territory (perceivable inspiration).
And what the answer gives us.
Answers represent reactions to suggested quests (want of outcome), living represents the perceiving problem within the perceivable solution, and each one (perceiving) already got access to everything (perceivable).
Suggested "us" (plural) tempts the perceiving one (singular) to ignore perceivable oneness (whole including partials).
Or what it does not give us is the answer in words.
All sound is given...waiting for others to shape answers out of suggestible words only ignores perceivable sound. Suggested "nothing" represents ones justification to ignore perceivable "everything". Denying sound represents dissonance within self, by willingly ignore to resonate with it.
is/is not dichotomy and every other dichotomy involved with words.
a) same trick...all words are suggested, ones consent to anything suggested represents wanting vs not wanting it. That's the foundation for every dichotomy aka suggested dualism aka tempting one to ignore oneself within balance (need/want) for a one vs one conflict (want vs not want) with other ones.
b) "is not" represents ones choice to ignore everything that is (perceivable inspiration) for that which is nothing (suggested information).
c) DICHOTOMY, noun [Gr., a division into two parts; to cut.]...two implies ones choice to count other ones with the suggested label "two". Take anything you believe to represents "two" and notice that each "one" has to exist at a different position (as partial within whole) for you to be able to perceive moving differences.
It's others who suggest "sameness" and "stillness; rest; cessation of motion" and they utilize mass fabrication of likeness (uniformity for example) to tempt the consenting many to consent to suggested sameness (e pluribus unum aka out of many, one).
Words themselves are divisions of the all
Balance divides; choice responses from the center of division. Sound (need) was before words (want or not want) can be...it's a choice.
left-brained
Left/right implies center choice. Brain (aka matter) implies within momentum (balance), hence choice.
way of interpreting
INTER'PRET, verb transitive [Latin interpretor, from interpres.] aka INTER (being internal) + PRESS (pressure; to urge with force aka forcing into)...the process of dying (whole) forces living resistance (partial) internally, which implies life being moved from inception towards death aka directed one way aka being (life) within direction (inception towards death).
The old philosphical chestnuts 'To do is to be' and 'To be is to do' has no mention of the word 'will' as in 'Do what thou wilt'.
a) to do implies being done by.
b) to be implies redoing while being done.
c) "do what thou will" tempts one to ignore what one needs will for.
In religion, the ego will is sublimated until the symbolic angel/angle is 'seen' or 'wrestled with' and defeated, so to say in words...
...while ignoring that the foundation of RELIGION; noun (Latin religio) - "to bind anew" represents giving up self (choice), while submitting to (choice) of others.
Choosing represents balancing (need or want) by "angling" within direction (forwards). Point (life) within line (inception towards death) meets corners aka external points aka angles/angels (guardian or despair).
The exultant religions give 'free will' as they enslave their passions to repeat.
Ones choice to consent to be bound anew (religio) to the suggesting choices of others, represents the contract law for self imposed slavery by willingly ignoring to be "free" will of choice within the "dom"inance of balance aka free (living) within dom (process of dying).
If the many (partials) ignore everything (whole) perceivable given to them, then the few gain the power to give or not give anything suggestible, which the few then utilize to further and further restrict the ignorant (partials) from what they're ignoring (whole).
Example...responsibilities in reality willingly ignored for the "call of duty" within fiction.
All function has 'need' as it's source and what we call will is the attractive or repulsive force.
FUNC'TION, noun [Latin functio, from fungor, to perform.] - "discharge"...each one represents the FUNGUR within the -TION aka discharged (loss) with the response-ability to recharge (growth).
Ego sublimated creates a neutrality of 'will' to the point that it's moot.
- NEUTRAL, adjective [Latin neuter.] - "not engaged on either side" + MOOT, verb transitive [Latin contra.] - "to debate; to discuss; to argue for and against"
a) willing an ego (accumulating suggested information within memory) implies ones choice of want (suggested) over need (perceivable), hence engagement aka ENGAGE (liable for a debt to a creditor) MENT (mind/memory). Willing/wanting suggested represents ones believe in it aka ones CREED (belief in; consent to) to the suggesting others; while taking on the suggested as DEBT (contracted burden).
b) choosing want over need shapes want vs not want among all those who also ignore need, hence establishing the CONTRA (imbalance) within FOR (balance).
That place where some attempt to arrive through dissection of words.
Those who choose to want (words) are tempted (want) by their lack of resistance (need) to want more. Inception represents arrival; death represents departure (back into wholeness)...the momentum within represents the place for life to be.
Yet we use words, don't we?
HAB'IT, noun [Latin habitus, from habeo, to have to hold]...very easy to hold onto temptation, very hard (living) to let go by resisting temptation (dying). The more one holds onto, the faster ones resistance diminishes...others brand temptation with words to make it easier to hold onto, hence requiring as little effort as continuing consent to believe in the suggested meaning thereof.
Renting and sewing.
a) RENT, noun - "a fissure; a break or breach made by force, torn asunder; split or burst by violence"...that represents living within the process of dying, hence being set apart within the whole.
b) SEW, verb - "to unite; fasten together"...that represents ones choice to ignore perceivable (apartheid) for suggested (togetherness).
needle and thread
NEED of THREAT (process of dying) to resist want for sustenance of self (living) aka loss inspiring growth.
We're fish exchanging spittle on dry land, says the Sufi.
Form (life) needs to adapt to flow (inception towards death) to sustain self, hence recharging form (growth) through resisting flow (inception). Ignoring this dries form out, while spending remaining resistance among other form.
We're slapped as we discuss the difference between the flag, the wind, the wave, the mind...
Aka reasoning as the self inflicted conflict among differences, while ignoring that perceiving moving differences represents perceivable inspiration for adaptation....why the need to adapt? To sustain temporary differences (living) within ongoing sameness (process of dying).
If everything perceivable would be the same, then why would one struggle to sustain self?
Realization is the first step
a) REALIZA'TION, noun [from realize.] - "the act of realizing or making real"...-TION already implies the enacting reality. Ones choice to resist suggested fiction, would grow ones discernment about being the reaction (living) within realization (process of dying), hence the reaction within generation.
b) the first step to be represents "become" aka come (process of dying) to be (living).
As a former and current wordaholic, I try to avoid them until I meet an old friend and then we'll reminisce.
REMINIS'CENCE, noun [Latin reminiscens, reminiscor, Gr. memory.]...that's where the masons of free (will) are building walls of ignorance through suggested words, ones consent cements into place, brick by brick.
clew in the thread
CLUE (inspiration) in the THREAT (process of dying)
Another way of saying the same thing, perhaps...
a) same one way (inception towards death); different perspectives within (life), hence ANOTH'ER, adjective - "not the same; different".
b) sound implies sameness; every saying (words) shaped within represents a difference. Shaping itself represents a different reaction within the same, enacting mold, hence SHAPE, verb - "to mold or make into a particular form", hence flow (whole) using momentum (mold) to shape form (partial).
This allows the partial (choice) to reshape (respond to formed shapes) within mold (balance).
Only when the 'will' and its choices are the same thing can the map no longer be confused with the territory.
a) FREE implies within dominance; WILL represents "want" within implied need, OF implies out of, and CHOICE implies within balance.
b) free will of choice represents different reactions, within the same enacting balance.
c) a thing implies a partial within a whole, hence differentiated (living) by momentum of wholeness (process of dying).
d) choice representing the temporary want (will) within the ongoing need (balance) implies being temporary disorder within ongoing order, hence CONFUSION, noun - "disorder; irregularity, want of order". Resisting the temptation thereof represents the status quo of adaptation from disorder (living) within order (process of dying).
e) every map suggested tempts oneself and others to ignore the perceivable territory at any moment. The map itself, just like every picture, represents a "captured moment" and capturing it implies ones choice to mentally consent to the suggested information, hence saving it within conscious memory as the representation of presented.
It's not about the physical map itself or shaping it, but each ones choice to consent to the suggestion thereof aka the suggestion of artificial within natural, and artificial (in opposition to natural) represents each ones choice to ignore perceivable for suggested.
The map isn't the issue, since the natural order dissolves it. It's ones choice to hold onto the suggested meaning thereof, which represents the artificial aka ones willing ignorance of natural.
territory-relation; alfred korzybski...
"the map is not the territory"...represents a "kosher" suggestion of vetted information. Why? Because the "is not" tempts others into the conflict of reason (is vs is not).
How could one discern between perceivable (territory) and suggested (map), if one consents to reason (is vs is not) within the controlled environment of a suggestion (nothing)?
-
The map "is" the territory, because each partial represents the whole.
-
The map "is not" the territory, because each partial can choose to ignore the whole for another partial.
Both choices (is or is not aka want or not want) tempt one to ignore ones position as choice within balance (need/want)...at the center, busy balancing, not inside a conflict with other choices.
He thought that certain uses of the verb "to be", called the "is of identity" and the "is of predication", were faulty in structure.
To be (partial) implies within that which is (whole). Therefore, one (being) can only shape within that which already is, hence drawing from (abstract) genuine (generated).
Predication (affirmation) represents the deception, since to be cannot affirm what is, without ignoring that everything was before one can choose to shape an affirmation about it. If I suggest "you exist", then that implies that I perceived you before I can suggest you that "you exist". Your consent to my suggestion shapes the distortion of abstract within genuine.
Thanks for the inspiration, I'm gonna put his book on my list... https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/25457
inner dialogue has to help survive loneliness
a) look around you...how could one, surrounded by everything, be lonely? Could the suggestions of others to unite, and the division shaped by trying to unite, tempt one into self imposed isolation, just to get away from all the conflict?
b) LONE, adjective - "solitary; single; standing by itself"...doesn't that represent every single "one" in existence? If existence represents a shared experience, then how could one discern self, perceive as self; comprehend for self...without being "one" self?
c) what if "alone" is being suggested to tempt justification for self imposed isolation (leave me alone), while containing a sleight of hand for those who resist suggested (fiction) for perceivable (reality)?
What if "alone" implies ALL (in) ONE aka all single (living) within one whole (process of dying)? What if all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", hence internal/inherent power representing whole/partial aka loss/growth aka action/reaction aka flow/form aka balance/choice aka living/process of dying?
d) SURVI'VE, verb [Latin supervivo.] - "to outlive"...can the living outlive the process of dying? What if the few suggest survivalism to tempt the many to place fear and hope towards suggested outcomes, while ignoring to resist perceivable origin for the prolonged sustenance of self?
effects of depression among women
From the perspective of female...impression (process of dying) for expression (growth) adds the intercourse with the male, hence compressing offspring within the uterus/womb. All the infertile; promiscuous behavior tempts compression without sustenance from within, hence depressing the female.
One gets as much out of it as one puts into writing it. What others do with it represents their free will of choice.
different modes of thinking
a) sameness represents the impressing origin of what can one think about, while all those with the ability to think represent the differences within.
b) different minds are being subjected by the same input (perceivable inspiration), yet tempted to ignore this for subjecting themselves to other differences (suggested information).
To make this worse...others suggest differences under the brand of "sameness". The many "want" to come together, while ignoring the "need" to sustain apartheid (living) within sameness (process of dying). This mass ignorance allows the few to stay apart within the many who pretend to be the same, when coming together.
I've never understood depression
a) expression (living) within impressing (process of dying) aka growth within loss, can choose to repress oneself by burdening (depression) oneself with information suggested by others, hence consenting to fill up conscious memory with suggested information, instead of utilizing it for adaptation to perceivable inspiration.
b) "understanding" represents ones choice to want to stand under what another one suggests one to consent to. The more one stands under, the more depressed one feels by the burden one consented to stand under.
I wonder if they are connected?
a) all represents one in energy, hence interconnection.
b) nature sets itself apart, from whole (loss) into partial (growth) aka being apart (living) within togetherness (process of dying), hence representing INTER (internal aka being within) CONNECT (fasten together) -TION (through action).
c) to wonder represents EMO'TION, noun [Latin emotio; emoveo, to move from.], which tempts one to ignore being (life) moved by (inception towards death), hence being within motion, while in need to resist the temptation to be moved from ones position.
This is why suggested temptation lures Alice into the Wonderland...
no internal dialogue
a) DIALOGUE, noun [Gr., to dispute; to speak.] - "conversation or conference between two or more persons".
b) the few suggest DIALOGISM, noun - "a feigned speech between two or more" by tempting oneself to have an internal monologue about the suggested information by others, hence simulating a feigned speech between two or more within ones memory.
c) speech represents the internally suggestible; sound represents the externally perceivable.
d) a MONOLOGUE, noun [Gr. sole, and speech.] - "a soliloquy; a speech uttered by a person alone" implies PER (by) SONOS (sound), hence between perceivable sound and ones perceiving resonance...not the dissonance shaped by consenting to the suggestions of others.
e) if ones internal monologue is shape in words, then one utilizes the suggested tools of miscommunication (suggested words over perceivable sound) from others. One doesn't need to brand what one thinks about..it represents ones choice to "want" to think in terminology (description of perceivable through suggested) by others.
a) whatever is being suggested before the -ism is being defined; redefined and contradicted by those suggesting it...not by those consenting to want or not want the suggested -ism.
b) wanting versus not wanting any suggested -ism represents "reasoning", which tricks those consenting to fight each other over the suggested, while giving those suggesting the control over both sides fighting.
In other words...division (reason) through suggestion.
c) "not" (nothing) represents the suggested inversion of everything perceivable, hence ones willing denial of perceivable (reality) for suggested (fiction) through ones choice of consent.
The expression by words tempts one to ignore the impressing sound, hence the collapse of temporary languages (membrane) through the ongoing vibration of sound.
the concept behind the word
a) object of thought (concept) tempts one to ignore being subjected to think within objectifying input, hence OB'JECT, noun [Latin objectum, objectus.] - "that about which any power or faculty is employed"...one represents the employment (employed mind) within all work (energy).
c) perceivable sound represents the foundation for every suggested word shaped out of it. Choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law represents the vector to inject the suggested (words) into those willingly ignoring perceivable (sound).
d) consenting to suggested words, while ignoring perceivable sound, tempts one "behind" the curtain (ignorance) of narratives suggested as words by others aka falling for spell-craft.
should be banished
A suggested proclamation or edict within the court of public opinion. Ones OPINION, noun - "the judgment which the mind forms of any proposition" implies consenting to want or not want the suggested proclamation, while ignoring the need to adapt to perceivable "justice" aka that which "just is"...not what others within suggest instead.
Self discernment offers the solution...JUDGE (process of dying as the ongoing input) MENT (living mind as the temporary reaction within). Free will of choice within the jurisdiction of balance...while tempted to judge the suggested choices by others.
a) CORDIS (to fasten) COMMOTIO (motion through agitation)...suggested progressivism.
b) living within the process of dying implies resisting (temporary growth) while progressing (ongoing loss).
It's ones free will of choice to follow suggested orders or be the resistance within the perceivable natural order.
"I know you'll get to like it if you give it a chance now...Come on cordis do the com-mo-tion"
a) the outside represents a map of the inside. The few suggest the many to scribble all over it, to stain and discolor, as to tempt them to ignore the map to self discernment.
b) pain (process of dying) generates gain (living)...the few suggest the inversion (no pain; no gain) to tempt the many to sustain self destruction willingly.
c) addicts are drawn to loss, while using gain for justification of addiction to loss. The few suggested gain (winning) to tempt the many to get addicted to losing (the house always wins).
Whenever I walk into a "happy new year", I utilize TEN, adjective [Latin decem.] to count DECEMBER (10); JANUARY (11); FEBRUARY (12)...MARCH (1) aka the SPRING, verb - "to begin to appear". And just you watch how happy life will be at spring...
a) suggestion represents the temptation to ignore perceivable (reality) for suggested (fiction).
b) consenting to suggested represents suicidal consent to genocidal suggestion. Why? Because self destruction (ignoring reality for fiction) has consequences for all others.
Furthermore, consent to suggested represents choice to choice contract law, payed for in credit (creed; belief, trust, submission), which establishes a battery for the suggested temptation to wreak havoc. As long as the contract is uphold, so long will the suicide/genocide battery be used.
c) suggesting after gaining consent represents the ongoing attempt to clean up the consequences of ignoring perceivable reality by suggesting justifications for the perceived contradiction between ignored reality and consented to fiction.
as a physician
a) every one represents the perceiving reaction within perceivable PHYS'IC, noun [Greek from nature; to produce.]
b) the few suggest PHYSI'CIAN, noun - "the art of healing moral diseases" aka artificial suggestions (in opposition of naturally perceivable solution) for those who consent to suggested moralism (rules of behavior from others, while ignoring that nature sets each one as "free" will of choice).
I believe
To believe represents ones consent to the suggestions of others, hence choice (consent) to choice (suggestion) contract law, which tempts one to ignore perceivable (balance) to perceiving (choice) natural law.
Believing (suggested) represents the inversion of adaptation (perceivable).
as a physician...I believe
The former implies the consent of all those who believe in a suggested physician, hence the latter representing the suggestion to believe "in the name of " others.
The mind of God has all concepts that can be drawn into your mind and released as needed.
a) what you're describing represents memory to memory information exchange, which ignores input to memory communication. A memory represents a reaction to enacting input. The web, stored as information on memory (server farms), requires an ongoing energy source to store, transfer and exchange information, which only then allows users to add their memory to the mix.
b) within reality...nature represents the ongoing input (perceivable), while those within (perceiving) represent the temporary memory, a memory required to have a moment(um) to think about reacting within enacting, hence to balance choices made.
Only memory allows choice to consider what was and what will be within what is.
c) the cause doesn't have a hold function, it's not a release from, it represents ongoing loss, which in return allows the effect to temporary grow, hence having a memory to hold onto growth (living) while within loss (process of dying).
d) the natural order doesn't require a need, since it simply goes on. The temporary chaos within the ongoing natural order require a need to distinguish themselves (the choice of want aka the will), hence struggling to sustain self as want within need. The living "need" the process of dying, yet the ongoing tempts the temporary to "want" to ignore resisting.
In simple...only if you put something into motion can there be a need/want balance (aka the momentum of motion) for a choice within to balance.
many people overwork their brain
a) if all represents one in EN'ERGY, noun [Gr. work.] - "internal or inherent power", then one exists at the center of work, hence "as above, so below". OVER and UNDER represent ones reacting choice within the need to WORK.
b) by consenting to the suggested information by the few, the many are willingly repressing their memories by accumulation. Meanwhile; adaptation to perceivable inspiration represents expression (growth) within impressing (loss).
c) the more perceivable one ignores for suggested, the less one comprehends (growth within) perceivable...hence self imposed repression of expression.
The few use suggestion to tempt the vessel (life) within flow (inception towards death) to drown itself by accumulating flotsam. The vessel doesn't need the stuff from others (suggested information), it needs to adapt to the flow (perceivable inspiration) as to be able to stay afloat.
just silence the mind
That implies ones choice to resist the suggested temptations from others, hence then allowing the mind to adapt to the perceivable flow of inspiration without (with less) distractions.
The real communication between perceivable (enacting) and perceiving (reaction) continues from inception towards death, hence throughout the entire life. The fictitious miscommunication between perceiving (reaction) and suggesting (reaction) represents the temptation to ignore the perceivable (enacting)...both coexist as balance aka need (perceivable) or want (suggested) for ones free will of choice.
The more one chooses the latter (temptation), the less one grows (resistance) within the former (velocity).
knowledge that is needed at the moment
The perceivable (knowledge) moment represents the momentum of ongoing motion. This momentum represents the self differentiation of ongoing whole (process of dying) into temporary partial (living), hence an ongoing balance for each temporary choice. Balancing (adaptation to momentum) represents the need; choice (to ignore adaptation) represents the want.
Hold your breath (choice to want to ignore need) and learn that need forces itself upon want...you now have a lifetime to learn from that lesson about the consequences of wanting to ignore need.
That way your brain gets to rest.
a) there can be only one way (inception towards death) for all life.
b) being within that way contradicts the cessation of motion (rest)..."no rest for the wicked (departed)"
c) RE (response to) ST (stop aka ones choice to ignore all motion)
a) the few suggest NET-WORK, noun - "a complication of threads united" as the inversion of simplicity of one line (inception towards death) dividing (life), hence nature setting itself apart from whole (process of dying) into each partial (living).
b) the few suggest TRANSMIS'SION, noun [Latin transmissio.] - "the act of sending from one place or person to another" as the inversion of MISSION (agent) TRANS-muting into regent aka enacting (process of dying) transmuting into reaction (living), hence sending everything (perceivable) towards everyone (perceiving).
All the information one sends (by suggestion) to one another (towards consent) tempts one to ignore perceivable inspiration aka the incoming communication of whole (perceivable) towards partial (perceiving).
In short...reality is coming in as inspiration, while the many are playing paddywack among each other over fictitious information.