submitted by anon to askanon7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:23:48 ago (+6/-0) (askanon)
I was curious and I did regression hypnosis about decade ago. It felt extremely emotional, like a real memory I would have. I later found a place and met a person from those "dreams", but I thought better to ignore it all, thinking that I must have seen it in some movie, or whatever trick was played by or on my subconscious.
Stupid me, I did it again recently, out of boredom I guess. This time the images were not traumatic, on the contrary. So I looked around that place the name I found years ago with google maps, and I found the exact same beach that I saw in hypnosis, they have wells there near the beach too, was mind blowing. I have no interest in that place, even now I see it's beautiful there though, almost same as where I am now. Neither I have any interest in times around first world war, so I never watched some war movies. So how is this even possible?
Do you have any experience with this or any theories?
Neither do I have any interest in the time period surrounding the first world war. As a result, I have never watched many of the war movies about that time.
Yes, and I'm a woman too, so I have some excuse not to watch war movies, hopefully. In my close family I have two relatives, who were in WW1, very high ranks too. One was killed, and one survived. So I know a few things about that war, but not from perspective one would get from watching movies or from history books, seeing pictures or reading about some data. For instance, I didn't know airplanes were used for bombing at that early time, and some other things.
Once you die it's game over for the meat suit,you don't get another one. You can be reborn spiritually but there can't be a rebirth physically because your soul is not transferable just like fingerprints,blood types etc. Which further proves the pagen religions believing they are god's,immortal physical beings or animals. Humans are the only species that understands death. Dogs DO NOT KNOW they are dieing.
Living more then one life is normal. The fact that we can't remember them is not. There are probably so many planets with sentient beings reincarnating on the planet. Normally you could just leave this system and go to another if you wanted however we are kept here like slaves to feed the demi-gods of this realm with our pain and suffering. When you die do not go towards the light without looking around. Be aware that you may be approached by entities that take the shape of your loved ones for example and try and convince you that you must go to the light. Once you go into the light you will be judged and given a resolution in another life to "pay" for what you've done. Once you sign the contract you will be thrust back into the womb and be born again. Ready to suffer again. Don't fall for this trap. Refuse to be judged.
No. I think all that stuff is suggestibility and imagination. I dont believe in anything supernatural or paranormal, like a spirit. It wasn’t the same beach or the same person. Your brain put together a thought of a beach and a person from many other beaches/people you have experienced before. Your emotions informed you that “this is the same beach/person” when actually it was just a similar beach/person, or the idea of one. Thats my opinion— Im a pretty skeptical, literal person. And glad of it.
Spirit/spiro - "to breathe"...few suggest spiritualism to tempt many to ignore breathing for believing A spirit aka ignoring that which moves through one for a being outside of one.
Furthermore...breathing implies differentiation not likeness. Many consenting to suggested -isms by few implies likeness, while ignoring differentiation.
It wasn’t the same
All implies same (motion); each one within implies difference (matter)...few suggest many to consent alike to distract from that.
You are bringing sperging to new heights friend. You are very creative to the point that I wonder if you don’t need meds to supress that creativity. Its very hard to follow your thinking ngl.
the word for breathe and spirit are related because ancient people associated a lack of breathe with the cessation of life force in a person who died. So there was a superstition that breathe had a magical power or quality. Thats just a coincidence.
Bless his heart, but as far as I can tell, the vast majority of his sentences are incoherent, and a slightly smaller majority are ungrammatical. I encountered him after the migration to Poal. The last thing I said to him was that if his philosophy makes sense expressed in English, then it ought to be clearly expressible in that language. He makes no attempt to clarify his concepts for the reader.
Few suggest what "ought to be" to tempt many to claim possession by consent, which in return makes many possessed by suggestions from few. Many call these possessions "faith; belief; conviction; hope; loyalty; truth; meaning etc."
b) Nature is clear...those within obscure each other.
To be in nature is to be a member of nature.
c) "Making no" implies suggesting nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing) to another...ones consent then "makes no", which obscures clarity within nature.
It is in the human nature to socialize, share, and communicate. Hence, it is in their nature to share language and ideas, if they have language. If your position is that accepting anyone else's statements is to give some kind of consent to them that removes you from nature (in whatever way that's supposed to be bad), then you shouldn't be communicating online. If you have something to say, then you're expecting other people to accept what you say, even if that comes to mere agreement with you.
A being cannot posses while being processed.
I have no idea what this means.
Few suggest what "ought to be" to tempt many to claim possession by consent, which in return makes many possessed by suggestions from few. Many call these possessions "faith; belief; conviction; hope; loyalty; truth; meaning etc.
This sounds like some morally skeptical anti-authoritarian sort of sentiment.
But if you're going to eschew truth, belief, and these other basic epistemic categories, you're just contradicting yourself trying to convince anybody of anything.
Taking apart writing...just like nature takes apart being from one another.
To be in nature is to be a member of nature.
Aka a partial within whole; differentiated from one another. The closer partials come together, the more they obscure what nature clears.
It is in the human nature
a) Human implies WITHIN NATURE, hence differentiated by nature, and thereby adapting to either natural (perceivable) or artificial (suggested).
b) Human aka "hue of man" implies color aka visible spectrum of light aka a setting apart of rays within a spectrum of visible light, which is how nature makes clear. Choosing to ignore this obscures the sight of those within.
to socialize, share, and communicate
a) TO implies "towards", hence being (life) moved from inception TOWARDS death, something each one needs to resist, yet wants to ignore, because it implies the path of least resistance.
b) Social implies together; being implies apart. Few suggest social-ism to tempt many together.
c) Sharing suggested information with one another, tempts one to ignore that nature offers all perceivable to each ones perception. This setting apart of all perceivable into each ones perception makes each one a SHARE within all.
Few suggest mercantilism aka buying (consent) and selling (suggest) to tempt many to sell out their shares by buying into another ones offer. Few are the share-croppers of many cattle.
d) Communicate implies transmitting together, which tempts one to ignore being transformed apart from one another within all flow.
The opposite of transmission (suggestion) implies reception (perception)...which one ignores when transmitting dis-ease to one another.
From a simpler perspective...millennia of written down communication vs a present state of international miscommunication. Maybe communication distracts from reception...
Entrance suggested sarcasm: "we gotta find ways to communicate even more"...
it is in their nature
a) One can only shape a suggestion about what IS by tempting others to ignore what WAS perceivable.
b) Nature isn't theirs; they are within nature, while ignoring that nature sets each one of them apart from one another.
If your position is that accepting...
Position implies within motion...acceptance destroys position (life) within motion (inception towards death).
Few tempt many to consent to suggested information, which establishes a conflict of reason aka acceptance vs denial.
that accepting anyone else's statements is to give some kind of consent to them
a) Does one choose acceptance of suggested? Was one choice within perceivable before one can choose to accept suggested?
b) Consent doesn't give to another, it tempts one to ignore all nature gave, while permitting another to take from one.
accepting anyone else's statements...removes you from nature
Ones state of mind (statement) is positioned within the process of nature. Holding onto an accepted statement by another, tempts one to ignore ones solid position (life) within fluid nature (inception towards death).
removes you from nature
Remove implies ones response to being moved within nature. A partial cannot remove anything from within whole, only respond to being moved apart within moving whole.
in whatever way that's supposed to be bad
a) Reasoning (good vs bad) against one another tempts one to ignore being (life) within way (inception towards death).
There's no second nature; only second/seco (to divide) of partials within whole of nature.
you shouldn't be communicating online
Being (life) implies within line (inception towards death), which isn't a should vs shouldn't conflict of reason, but an implied process forcing ones adaptation.
Communication online within a world wide web aka internal net (internet) requires ones consent to log in, which establishes a conflict of reason between online vs offline, while ignoring being IN LINE.
Nature doesn't suggest what shouldn't be...it continuously generates temporal being.
you're expecting other people to accept
a) Accept vs denial doesn't exist withing nature unless one ignores natural (perceivable need) for artificial (wanting vs not wanting suggested).
b) Expectation implies wanting from another one, while ignoring needing to adapt to all.
To expect implies "reaching forward"; being implies adapting to origin...not towards outcome.
even if that comes to mere agreement with you.
Minds are separated from one another, hence at odds (perception) within even (perceivable)...agreeing to a suggestion tempts odds against each other aka agree vs disagree...that's uneven.
"A being cannot posses while being processed"...I have no idea what this means.
a) Can you hold onto life; while being moved from inception towards death? Try holding your breathe while thinking about that...
You are being tricked to believe that you can posses/own/hold onto anything, while you ignore that everything moves. If you hold onto a pet, then shortly thereafter it will struggle to set itself free from your grasp, because you're suffocating it. That goes for anything you physically or mentally hold onto/try to posses.
One WANTS to hold onto, one NEEDS to let go...needing to resist wanted temptations sustains being.
b) Suggested idealism tempts one to shape mental ideas aka affixed artificial constructs, which one then tries to apply to a moving nature.
sounds like...anti-authoritarian
Sound implies same; each one within sound implies different from one another...unless choosing to respond "alike".
Being able to respond implies being enabled to wield free will of choice...that's authorization. Using ones choice to consent to a chosen ones suggestion authorizes another to choose for one...one can't do this without ignoring that nature authorizes each ones free will of choice...no matter if one chooses to bind self to another authority.
to eschew truth, belief, and these other basic epistemic categories
Truth; belief and categorization contradict epistemic (perceivable knowledge). Why? Because one holds onto suggested truth; believes suggested information, and categorizes together that which nature sets apart.
to convince anybody
Convince implies "conquer together"; being implies "released apart"...hence wielding FREE will of choice.
you're just contradicting yourself
Contra implies against another...who am I against, when describing how conflicts of reason tempt one against another?
In this entire response...where did I chose a side against (versus/contra) another?
Inception sentences life towards point of death...suggested creationism tempts one to ignore that, because it suggests creation out of nothing, instead of transformation within everything.
Its very hard to follow your thinking
If life is being moved from inception towards death, then following WHATEVER others are suggesting tempts life to reach death sooner.
Nature inspires life to resist origin; few suggest progressivism to tempt many to follow along leads.
The more one follows; the harder it becomes for one to resist temptation.
the word for breathe and spirit are related
Are sound and word related? Can a word be shaped within sound without a living being "breathing life into it", hence artificially inflating a crafted spell for others to hold onto?
people associated
Off-spring implies a separation of each person from one another...few suggest collectivism (people) to tempt many to associate with each other.
What are you...a person or a people? Can one trick a singular to ignore self for association with a plural?
lack of breathe
What if velocity (inception towards death) is ongoing, and resistance )life) only temporal...does velocity run out of breath, or does inhaling and exhaling cost too much resistance to sustain for long?
What if surplus (life) can only come to be "during" lack (inception towards death), hence temporal growth during ongoing loss? Could the majority of mankind be tricked by few to ignore that?
From a different perspective...if gentiles are $35 trillion in debt, then what is a jew lacking?
the cessation of life force in a person
Person/per sonos aka by sound...what if suggested "in person" tempts one to ignore being PER IN SON aka byproduct within sound? What if sound is the force of cessation, which generates life as the force of temporal continuation?
a person who died
If that which is by (per) sound (sonos) dies, then does sound continue or also die? If matter dies within motion; then motion...continues to generate matter.
a magical power
Magic/magh- "to be able, have power"...magic implies being enabled by...?
Im happy to interact with you but I think you should strive to be a little more relatable. Thats why you’re here Im fairly sure. We aren’t in your head. You should try to curb some of the solopsism. Its the price we all pay in order to be understood.
INTER (internal; within) ACT (action) implies reaction. One can only react to one another...not interact with one another.
A jew suggests interactivity to tempts gentiles to ignore their reactions, when giving consent aka when shirking response-ability (free will of choice).
All the interactions with one another are artificial, and one doesn't relate to others, each one is being set apart from one another. Gentiles are being told to seek agreement with one another to establish order...the natural order sets chaos apart from one another to generate being.
you should strive to be
Striving towards (death) destroys being (life)...and only another can suggest one that "you should". Perceivable nature doesn't suggest life to strive towards death; it inspires life to resist being moved towards death.
Being implies forced adaption...that ain't a "should vs shouldn't" proposition; but a must.
That's why you’re here
HERE implies within perceivable moment(um). WHY implies self sustenance of matter (life) within momentum (inception towards death) of motion.
THAT IS implies the suggestion of another tempting one to ignore what WAS perceivable.
We aren’t in your head.
All perceivable flows through each ones formed perception...that's how singularity operates. Suggested pluralism (we) tempts one to hold suggested information together within ones mind/memory aka within ones head.
The issue isn't lack of access to what goes on within the head of another, but that ones head/mind/memory holds onto information, while ignoring to be within an ongoing process of inspiration.
try to curb some of the solopsism
SOLUS (alone) IPSE (self) implies by oneself...-ism implies as suggested by another. ISM contradicts SOLOPS. Why is it that only others suggest one to curb self? Nature neither shapes suggested -isms; nor does it suggest life to curb itself.
What if it's your consent to suggested solipsism, which shapes you into a solipsist, while tempting you to suggest others to curb expressions of self?
the price we all pay in order to be understood.
a) Nature sets each one FREE from one another with FREE will of choice...choosing to pay another by selling self out is optional.
b) "we all" implies suggested pluralism (we) and collectivism (all). There's no "we" until one chooses to be part of what another one suggests, and one cannot be all, while being one within all.
It doesn't matter how many partials come together, they can never be whole. The pieces of a puzzle can never become the whole picture, because separation of whole into partials sets them apart from one another, which is why one can see the outline of partials in the complete picture.
Understood
Understanding implies "standing under", when consenting to suggested information, which becomes a burden upon self, hence dragging one down.
One doesn't need to stand under another, one needs to rise above self. Nature continuously drains ones resistance, while choosing to resist (need) temptation (want) grows ones resistance.
Nature implies the generator that allows each reactor within to re-generate...or ignore it. Gentiles ignore regeneration, which permits a jew to drain reactors.
tl;dr: How about you choose to topic and the pace of your responses, and draw whatever inspires from my responses? I can adapt to others...without slowing myself down.
"Think different" is an advertising slogan used from 1997 to 2002 by Apple Computer, Inc., now named Apple Inc.
It can lead to very insightful insights. If wanting to communicate those insights to other people, they typically need to be translated back to standard English to be received and processed.
Ones sight within all perceivable requires one to resist the suggestion by others. Suggested "insight" inverts perceivable "sight within".
"Think different" is an advertising
Advert implies "turning towards" suggested, while ignoring that all perceivable differentiates each ones perception. Consenting to an advertisement tempts many minds to turn towards the suggestions by few.
If wanting to communicate
a) Want tempts one to ignore need, hence wanting to consent to suggested tempting one to ignore needing to adapt to perceivable.
b) COM (together) UNI (one)...one implies apart from one another, and ATION (action) sets each ones reaction apart from one another. Nature doesn't communicate; it sets units apart aka differentiation aka separation of whole into partials etc.
typically need
Typical/typicalis - "symbolic" implies suggested symbolism aka SYN (together) BOLE (casting; throwing), which tempts consenting many together.
Few cast symbolic (suggested information) to tempt many to ignore actual (perceivable inspiration). Few then tempt many to use symbolic (words) to communicate within actual (sound)...only oneself can resist this temptation to deceive self by consenting to another.
I can see through this, but cannot share my sight within actual using symbolic language. Others can only see the symbolic language, while lacking sight within actual...which each one willingly ignores when consenting to a suggested symbol/word/information/definition/name/number/brand/meaning etc.
to be translated
To be implies trans-formed (life) during flow (inception towards death)...few suggest information to tempt many to hold onto it, which establishes LATENCY aka delayed reactions within perceivable. That's why few utilize spell-craft to trans-late perceivable sound into suggestible words.
standard
Being implies matter (life) within motion (inception towards death) aka differentiation/alternation...not standardization. Few suggest many to consent alike, while ignoring to be different from one another aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one).
need to be translated back to standard English to be received and processed.
Nature is the needed process for each one within, while others tempt one to receive aka RE (respond to) CEIVE/KAPERE/KAP (to grasp)...one cannot hold onto an ongoing process of differentiation, but one can be tricked to hold onto each other, which destroys differentiation, hence destroying oneself and others.
English implies "angular"...being implies curving (life) during straight (inception towards death). Another inversion.
apple
Aka apply (join or combine), hence the temptation for ONE to apply (bite the apple) of another ONEs suggestion. Notice that the Apple logo shows the already bitten apple...
Difficult aka cultivated differently...symbolic language tempts many to consent alike to the same suggested meaning by few, while ignoring that ones sight implies cultivated differentiation/alternation/separation etc.
Cult (perception) or occult (suggestion)...it's ones free will of choice.
Given the efficacy of advertising, 'brainwashing', and cultural mind control, it's debatable whether 'free will of choice' is a reality with most people. It's either the case that most peoples brains in western societies (herds) are wildly malfunctioning, or their thoughts and behaviors are programmed by their rancher owners.
Efficacy (consent) of advertising (suggested) implies ones free will of choice. Ad-vert implies turning towards aka ones consent turning towards suggested and away from perceivable.
brainwashing
Holding onto suggested establishes a constipation within perceivable...nature is gonna wash that out of ones brain. From a different perspective...nature directs all perceivable through ones perception, reasoning about suggested implies circular logic.
Circular during linear implies a washing-machine aka water in; water tumbling; water out...reason implies brainwashing.
cultural mind control
Con-trol aka rolling together aka many reasoning against one another, which few cultivate with suggested information to hold onto and mentally turn over within mind/memory.
it's debatable whether 'free will of choice' is a reality
a) Debating aka reasoning about suggested (fiction); while ignoring perceivable (reality)...binds ones free will of choice to another.
b) FREE implies within dominance; WILL (aka want) implies within need; OF implies out of; hence being within; CHOICE implies within balance.
That is what re-al aka ones response within all implies.
c) Free will of choice implies reality, ignoring it for the fiction suggested by another is what FREE entails aka free to fuck yourself over by shirking response-ability onto another in blissful ignorance of responsibility.
It's either the case that most peoples brains in western societies (herds) are wildly malfunctioning
Consenting to suggested information establishes a case within ones brain...a fictitious casing, shielding one from reality.
Case/cadere - "to fall; settle down; decline"...holding onto suggested implies putting a burden upon self, while struggling to grow (life) during perceivable loss (inception towards death). The more memory holds onto; the quicker decline within procession.
their thoughts and behaviors
a) A thought needs to move through ones mind, which offers choice the need to let go and the want to hold onto. Revolving a thought implies a conflict of reason (wanting vs not wanting to hold onto)...while ignoring the need to let go.
b) Behavior implies "being having"...a being within procession cannot have aka hold possession; only express potential by resisting the temptation to hold onto.
Inside of balance...one cannot "have" choice; only wield choice during the alternation of balancing. Having a choice implies being able to hold onto a side, which ignores that balance can only exist within motion.
When I've thought about the subject it comes to this theory of mine.
I don't believe in straight up reincarnation like you remember your other life. I believe consciousness can be fleeting. Gone today. Back tomorrow as an entirely different person but conscious again. Gets theoretical as what decides. Is a rabbit aware? How in the universe does one truly understand how they came to be. I'm rambling now and confusing myself so I'll stop.
Yeah, I like this thinking, must be something like this. I almost know there is no reincarnation, I think believing this is a mind trap. But if an artist can get an "inspiration" from nowhere, then our subconscious can be influenced not only by what we really experience, but also by some other "stuff", whatever one calls this.
[ - ] __47__ 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:44:16 ago (+1/-0)
What I was getting at is how do you know you'll come back with a conscious? My cats and dogs are aware of their surroundings they can feel my energy but were they human before? How did I hit the jackpot to be human and they arent. What makes them them?
lol was just some village somewhere, I found it because I have seen the weapon Germans used there and how was after that, the ruins. From what I found on google, this was used just in two or three parts of Europe, and the other places are a complete miss, this freaking one is a perfect match. Buildings, landscape, even the train.
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 8889560 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:34:51 ago (+0/-0)
What?
[ + ] PotatoWhisperer2
[ - ] PotatoWhisperer2 2 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:48:32 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] anon
[ - ] anon 2700406 [op] 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:25:35 ago (+0/-0)
In my close family I have two relatives, who were in WW1, very high ranks too. One was killed, and one survived. So I know a few things about that war, but not from perspective one would get from watching movies or from history books, seeing pictures or reading about some data. For instance, I didn't know airplanes were used for bombing at that early time, and some other things.
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 3708576 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:28:18 ago (+0/-0)
You can be reborn spiritually but there can't be a rebirth physically because your soul is not transferable just like fingerprints,blood types etc.
Which further proves the pagen religions believing they are god's,immortal physical beings or animals.
Humans are the only species that understands death.
Dogs DO NOT KNOW they are dieing.
[ + ] mikenigger
[ - ] mikenigger 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:33:21 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] Smedleys_Butler
[ - ] Smedleys_Butler 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:47:20 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 3778195 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 20:14:12 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 3313437 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 21:37:51 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 1470539 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:46:55 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason -1 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:27:59 ago (+0/-1)
Everything perceivable implies reality; wondering about anything suggested implies fiction.
[ + ]anon
[ - ] anon 3970947 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:21:26 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] anon
[ - ] anon 2700406 [op] 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:27:03 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:47:54 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] anon
[ - ] anon 2700406 [op] 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:34:21 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason -1 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:26:50 ago (+0/-1)
Spirit/spiro - "to breathe"...few suggest spiritualism to tempt many to ignore breathing for believing A spirit aka ignoring that which moves through one for a being outside of one.
Furthermore...breathing implies differentiation not likeness. Many consenting to suggested -isms by few implies likeness, while ignoring differentiation.
All implies same (motion); each one within implies difference (matter)...few suggest many to consent alike to distract from that.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 2 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 11:35:27 ago (+2/-0)
the word for breathe and spirit are related because ancient people associated a lack of breathe with the cessation of life force in a person who died. So there was a superstition that breathe had a magical power or quality. Thats just a coincidence.
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 2 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:35:15 ago (+2/-0)
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 22:35:17 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 14:40:24 ago (+0/-0)
a) Nature doesn't write concepts for readers.
b) Nature is clear...those within obscure each other.
c) "Making no" implies suggesting nihil-ism (Latin nihilo; nothing) to another...ones consent then "makes no", which obscures clarity within nature.
Ought/agan - "to own; posses; owe" https://www.etymonline.com/word/ought A being cannot posses while being processed.
Few suggest what "ought to be" to tempt many to claim possession by consent, which in return makes many possessed by suggestions from few. Many call these possessions "faith; belief; conviction; hope; loyalty; truth; meaning etc."
[ + ] CHIRO
[ - ] CHIRO 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 14:49:00 ago (+0/-0)
Nature doesn't write either, yet you are writing.
To be in nature is to be a member of nature.
It is in the human nature to socialize, share, and communicate. Hence, it is in their nature to share language and ideas, if they have language. If your position is that accepting anyone else's statements is to give some kind of consent to them that removes you from nature (in whatever way that's supposed to be bad), then you shouldn't be communicating online. If you have something to say, then you're expecting other people to accept what you say, even if that comes to mere agreement with you.
I have no idea what this means.
This sounds like some morally skeptical anti-authoritarian sort of sentiment.
But if you're going to eschew truth, belief, and these other basic epistemic categories, you're just contradicting yourself trying to convince anybody of anything.
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 16:09:52 ago (+0/-0)
Taking apart writing...just like nature takes apart being from one another.
Aka a partial within whole; differentiated from one another. The closer partials come together, the more they obscure what nature clears.
a) Human implies WITHIN NATURE, hence differentiated by nature, and thereby adapting to either natural (perceivable) or artificial (suggested).
b) Human aka "hue of man" implies color aka visible spectrum of light aka a setting apart of rays within a spectrum of visible light, which is how nature makes clear. Choosing to ignore this obscures the sight of those within.
a) TO implies "towards", hence being (life) moved from inception TOWARDS death, something each one needs to resist, yet wants to ignore, because it implies the path of least resistance.
b) Social implies together; being implies apart. Few suggest social-ism to tempt many together.
c) Sharing suggested information with one another, tempts one to ignore that nature offers all perceivable to each ones perception. This setting apart of all perceivable into each ones perception makes each one a SHARE within all.
Few suggest mercantilism aka buying (consent) and selling (suggest) to tempt many to sell out their shares by buying into another ones offer. Few are the share-croppers of many cattle.
d) Communicate implies transmitting together, which tempts one to ignore being transformed apart from one another within all flow.
The opposite of transmission (suggestion) implies reception (perception)...which one ignores when transmitting dis-ease to one another.
From a simpler perspective...millennia of written down communication vs a present state of international miscommunication. Maybe communication distracts from reception...
Entrance suggested sarcasm: "we gotta find ways to communicate even more"...
a) One can only shape a suggestion about what IS by tempting others to ignore what WAS perceivable.
b) Nature isn't theirs; they are within nature, while ignoring that nature sets each one of them apart from one another.
Position implies within motion...acceptance destroys position (life) within motion (inception towards death).
Few tempt many to consent to suggested information, which establishes a conflict of reason aka acceptance vs denial.
a) Does one choose acceptance of suggested? Was one choice within perceivable before one can choose to accept suggested?
b) Consent doesn't give to another, it tempts one to ignore all nature gave, while permitting another to take from one.
Ones state of mind (statement) is positioned within the process of nature. Holding onto an accepted statement by another, tempts one to ignore ones solid position (life) within fluid nature (inception towards death).
Remove implies ones response to being moved within nature. A partial cannot remove anything from within whole, only respond to being moved apart within moving whole.
a) Reasoning (good vs bad) against one another tempts one to ignore being (life) within way (inception towards death).
b) Whatever implies "being of one nature or another" https://webstersdictionary1828.com/Dictionary/whatever That contradicts being one among one another within oneness of nature.
There's no second nature; only second/seco (to divide) of partials within whole of nature.
Being (life) implies within line (inception towards death), which isn't a should vs shouldn't conflict of reason, but an implied process forcing ones adaptation.
Communication online within a world wide web aka internal net (internet) requires ones consent to log in, which establishes a conflict of reason between online vs offline, while ignoring being IN LINE.
Nature doesn't suggest what shouldn't be...it continuously generates temporal being.
a) Accept vs denial doesn't exist withing nature unless one ignores natural (perceivable need) for artificial (wanting vs not wanting suggested).
b) Expectation implies wanting from another one, while ignoring needing to adapt to all.
To expect implies "reaching forward"; being implies adapting to origin...not towards outcome.
Minds are separated from one another, hence at odds (perception) within even (perceivable)...agreeing to a suggestion tempts odds against each other aka agree vs disagree...that's uneven.
a) Can you hold onto life; while being moved from inception towards death? Try holding your breathe while thinking about that...
You are being tricked to believe that you can posses/own/hold onto anything, while you ignore that everything moves. If you hold onto a pet, then shortly thereafter it will struggle to set itself free from your grasp, because you're suffocating it. That goes for anything you physically or mentally hold onto/try to posses.
One WANTS to hold onto, one NEEDS to let go...needing to resist wanted temptations sustains being.
b) Suggested idealism tempts one to shape mental ideas aka affixed artificial constructs, which one then tries to apply to a moving nature.
Sound implies same; each one within sound implies different from one another...unless choosing to respond "alike".
Being able to respond implies being enabled to wield free will of choice...that's authorization. Using ones choice to consent to a chosen ones suggestion authorizes another to choose for one...one can't do this without ignoring that nature authorizes each ones free will of choice...no matter if one chooses to bind self to another authority.
Truth; belief and categorization contradict epistemic (perceivable knowledge). Why? Because one holds onto suggested truth; believes suggested information, and categorizes together that which nature sets apart.
Convince implies "conquer together"; being implies "released apart"...hence wielding FREE will of choice.
Contra implies against another...who am I against, when describing how conflicts of reason tempt one against another?
In this entire response...where did I chose a side against (versus/contra) another?
Reason (versus) contradicts implication (if/then)...suggestion contradicts perception.
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason -1 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:14:51 ago (+0/-1)*
Inception sentences life towards point of death...suggested creationism tempts one to ignore that, because it suggests creation out of nothing, instead of transformation within everything.
If life is being moved from inception towards death, then following WHATEVER others are suggesting tempts life to reach death sooner.
Nature inspires life to resist origin; few suggest progressivism to tempt many to follow along leads.
The more one follows; the harder it becomes for one to resist temptation.
Are sound and word related? Can a word be shaped within sound without a living being "breathing life into it", hence artificially inflating a crafted spell for others to hold onto?
Off-spring implies a separation of each person from one another...few suggest collectivism (people) to tempt many to associate with each other.
What are you...a person or a people? Can one trick a singular to ignore self for association with a plural?
What if velocity (inception towards death) is ongoing, and resistance )life) only temporal...does velocity run out of breath, or does inhaling and exhaling cost too much resistance to sustain for long?
What if surplus (life) can only come to be "during" lack (inception towards death), hence temporal growth during ongoing loss? Could the majority of mankind be tricked by few to ignore that?
From a different perspective...if gentiles are $35 trillion in debt, then what is a jew lacking?
Person/per sonos aka by sound...what if suggested "in person" tempts one to ignore being PER IN SON aka byproduct within sound? What if sound is the force of cessation, which generates life as the force of temporal continuation?
If that which is by (per) sound (sonos) dies, then does sound continue or also die? If matter dies within motion; then motion...continues to generate matter.
Magic/magh- "to be able, have power"...magic implies being enabled by...?
What's the opposite of magic? https://www.wordhippo.com/what-is/the-opposite-of/magic.html NATURE! What do the many ignore for the suggested magic spells by few? Perceivable nature!
How does a magic spell transfers power in-between enabled beings? Consent (ones choice) enables suggestion (chosen one)...
Coincidence aka Co-in-cidence aka CO (together; with) IN (being within) CIDENCE/CADERE/KAD (to fall).
Being implies falling (inception towards death) apart (life) from one another...hence no coincidences, unless ignored.
[ + ] PostWallHelena
[ - ] PostWallHelena 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:33:52 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 14:29:06 ago (+0/-0)
INTER (internal; within) ACT (action) implies reaction. One can only react to one another...not interact with one another.
A jew suggests interactivity to tempts gentiles to ignore their reactions, when giving consent aka when shirking response-ability (free will of choice).
All the interactions with one another are artificial, and one doesn't relate to others, each one is being set apart from one another. Gentiles are being told to seek agreement with one another to establish order...the natural order sets chaos apart from one another to generate being.
Striving towards (death) destroys being (life)...and only another can suggest one that "you should". Perceivable nature doesn't suggest life to strive towards death; it inspires life to resist being moved towards death.
Being implies forced adaption...that ain't a "should vs shouldn't" proposition; but a must.
HERE implies within perceivable moment(um). WHY implies self sustenance of matter (life) within momentum (inception towards death) of motion.
THAT IS implies the suggestion of another tempting one to ignore what WAS perceivable.
All perceivable flows through each ones formed perception...that's how singularity operates. Suggested pluralism (we) tempts one to hold suggested information together within ones mind/memory aka within ones head.
The issue isn't lack of access to what goes on within the head of another, but that ones head/mind/memory holds onto information, while ignoring to be within an ongoing process of inspiration.
SOLUS (alone) IPSE (self) implies by oneself...-ism implies as suggested by another. ISM contradicts SOLOPS. Why is it that only others suggest one to curb self? Nature neither shapes suggested -isms; nor does it suggest life to curb itself.
What if it's your consent to suggested solipsism, which shapes you into a solipsist, while tempting you to suggest others to curb expressions of self?
a) Nature sets each one FREE from one another with FREE will of choice...choosing to pay another by selling self out is optional.
b) "we all" implies suggested pluralism (we) and collectivism (all). There's no "we" until one chooses to be part of what another one suggests, and one cannot be all, while being one within all.
It doesn't matter how many partials come together, they can never be whole. The pieces of a puzzle can never become the whole picture, because separation of whole into partials sets them apart from one another, which is why one can see the outline of partials in the complete picture.
Understanding implies "standing under", when consenting to suggested information, which becomes a burden upon self, hence dragging one down.
One doesn't need to stand under another, one needs to rise above self. Nature continuously drains ones resistance, while choosing to resist (need) temptation (want) grows ones resistance.
Nature implies the generator that allows each reactor within to re-generate...or ignore it. Gentiles ignore regeneration, which permits a jew to drain reactors.
tl;dr: How about you choose to topic and the pace of your responses, and draw whatever inspires from my responses? I can adapt to others...without slowing myself down.
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:13:16 ago (+0/-0)
It can lead to very insightful insights. If wanting to communicate those insights to other people, they typically need to be translated back to standard English to be received and processed.
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 13:45:50 ago (+1/-1)
Ones sight within all perceivable requires one to resist the suggestion by others. Suggested "insight" inverts perceivable "sight within".
Advert implies "turning towards" suggested, while ignoring that all perceivable differentiates each ones perception. Consenting to an advertisement tempts many minds to turn towards the suggestions by few.
a) Want tempts one to ignore need, hence wanting to consent to suggested tempting one to ignore needing to adapt to perceivable.
b) COM (together) UNI (one)...one implies apart from one another, and ATION (action) sets each ones reaction apart from one another. Nature doesn't communicate; it sets units apart aka differentiation aka separation of whole into partials etc.
Typical/typicalis - "symbolic" implies suggested symbolism aka SYN (together) BOLE (casting; throwing), which tempts consenting many together.
Few cast symbolic (suggested information) to tempt many to ignore actual (perceivable inspiration). Few then tempt many to use symbolic (words) to communicate within actual (sound)...only oneself can resist this temptation to deceive self by consenting to another.
I can see through this, but cannot share my sight within actual using symbolic language. Others can only see the symbolic language, while lacking sight within actual...which each one willingly ignores when consenting to a suggested symbol/word/information/definition/name/number/brand/meaning etc.
To be implies trans-formed (life) during flow (inception towards death)...few suggest information to tempt many to hold onto it, which establishes LATENCY aka delayed reactions within perceivable. That's why few utilize spell-craft to trans-late perceivable sound into suggestible words.
Being implies matter (life) within motion (inception towards death) aka differentiation/alternation...not standardization. Few suggest many to consent alike, while ignoring to be different from one another aka e pluribus unum (out of many; one).
Nature is the needed process for each one within, while others tempt one to receive aka RE (respond to) CEIVE/KAPERE/KAP (to grasp)...one cannot hold onto an ongoing process of differentiation, but one can be tricked to hold onto each other, which destroys differentiation, hence destroying oneself and others.
English implies "angular"...being implies curving (life) during straight (inception towards death). Another inversion.
Aka apply (join or combine), hence the temptation for ONE to apply (bite the apple) of another ONEs suggestion. Notice that the Apple logo shows the already bitten apple...
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 15:08:20 ago (+0/-0)
It can be difficult.
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 16:13:53 ago (+0/-0)
Cult (perception) or occult (suggestion)...it's ones free will of choice.
[ + ] Sector2
[ - ] Sector2 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 16:40:19 ago (+0/-0)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b1o68h4Usqs - "Rock 'N' Roll Nigger" (outside of society)
[ + ] ImplicationOverReason
[ - ] ImplicationOverReason 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 17:49:30 ago (+0/-0)
Efficacy (consent) of advertising (suggested) implies ones free will of choice. Ad-vert implies turning towards aka ones consent turning towards suggested and away from perceivable.
Holding onto suggested establishes a constipation within perceivable...nature is gonna wash that out of ones brain. From a different perspective...nature directs all perceivable through ones perception, reasoning about suggested implies circular logic.
Circular during linear implies a washing-machine aka water in; water tumbling; water out...reason implies brainwashing.
Con-trol aka rolling together aka many reasoning against one another, which few cultivate with suggested information to hold onto and mentally turn over within mind/memory.
a) Debating aka reasoning about suggested (fiction); while ignoring perceivable (reality)...binds ones free will of choice to another.
b) FREE implies within dominance; WILL (aka want) implies within need; OF implies out of; hence being within; CHOICE implies within balance.
That is what re-al aka ones response within all implies.
c) Free will of choice implies reality, ignoring it for the fiction suggested by another is what FREE entails aka free to fuck yourself over by shirking response-ability onto another in blissful ignorance of responsibility.
Consenting to suggested information establishes a case within ones brain...a fictitious casing, shielding one from reality.
Case/cadere - "to fall; settle down; decline"...holding onto suggested implies putting a burden upon self, while struggling to grow (life) during perceivable loss (inception towards death). The more memory holds onto; the quicker decline within procession.
a) A thought needs to move through ones mind, which offers choice the need to let go and the want to hold onto. Revolving a thought implies a conflict of reason (wanting vs not wanting to hold onto)...while ignoring the need to let go.
b) Behavior implies "being having"...a being within procession cannot have aka hold possession; only express potential by resisting the temptation to hold onto.
Inside of balance...one cannot "have" choice; only wield choice during the alternation of balancing. Having a choice implies being able to hold onto a side, which ignores that balance can only exist within motion.
[ + ] __47__
[ - ] __47__ 2 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:57:40 ago (+2/-0)
I don't believe in straight up reincarnation like you remember your other life. I believe consciousness can be fleeting. Gone today. Back tomorrow as an entirely different person but conscious again. Gets theoretical as what decides. Is a rabbit aware? How in the universe does one truly understand how they came to be. I'm rambling now and confusing myself so I'll stop.
[ + ] anon
[ - ] anon 2700406 [op] 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:32:56 ago (+0/-0)
[ + ] __47__
[ - ] __47__ 1 point 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 12:44:16 ago (+1/-0)
[ + ] Panic
[ - ] Panic 4 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:31:34 ago (+4/-0)
Wassup?
[ + ] anon
[ - ] anon 2700406 [op] 0 points 7 monthsSep 26, 2024 10:36:25 ago (+0/-0)