How could we be free when we are chained to bodies?

[bahman]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

I can grasp the last part, of your statement. As a reactionary isolation, which, given the symbiosis context of the last statement, is "peaceful".

I cannot follow you. What do you mean by reactionary isolation?

In terms of the question, an equivalent concern of that issue is supporting the inevitability as a peace, when the means for the practitioner consists of the death of physics.

What do you mean?

[trokanmariel]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

I can grasp the last part, of your statement. As a reactionary isolation, which, given the symbiosis context of the last statement, is "peaceful".

I cannot follow you. What do you mean by reactionary isolation?

In terms of the question, an equivalent concern of that issue is supporting the inevitability as a peace, when the means for the practitioner consists of the death of physics.

What do you mean?

What I meant, by reactionary isolation, is the laws of nature unit of nature grabbing the bodies of reality, as a taking.

The problem, with the second issue, is that it is about my own experience of reality being expected to translate itself onto the general.

The general: it is the means of assembly of mean. This is middle (means) using the reward objective (assembly).


What is "mean", the last part of the aforementioned chronology?

It is the objective to assimilate intent with product


For Hugh Grant

[bahman]

I can grasp the last part, of your statement. As a reactionary isolation, which, given the symbiosis context of the last statement, is "peaceful".

I cannot follow you. What do you mean by reactionary isolation?

In terms of the question, an equivalent concern of that issue is supporting the inevitability as a peace, when the means for the practitioner consists of the death of physics.

What do you mean?

What I meant, by reactionary isolation, is the laws of nature unit of nature grabbing the bodies of reality, as a taking.

The problem, with the second issue, is that it is about my own experience of reality being expected to translate itself onto the general.

The general: it is the means of assembly of mean. This is middle (means) using the reward objective (assembly).

What is "mean", the last part of the aforementioned chronology?

It is the objective to assimilate intent with product

For Hugh Grant

I cannot understand what you are talking about.

[trokanmariel]

I cannot follow you. What do you mean by reactionary isolation?


What do you mean?

What I meant, by reactionary isolation, is the laws of nature unit of nature grabbing the bodies of reality, as a taking.

The problem, with the second issue, is that it is about my own experience of reality being expected to translate itself onto the general.

The general: it is the means of assembly of mean. This is middle (means) using the reward objective (assembly).

What is "mean", the last part of the aforementioned chronology?

It is the objective to assimilate intent with product

For Hugh Grant

I cannot understand what you are talking about.

To explain what it is that I mean, I'll need you to take a leap of faith with me:

It's my belief, that over the past two years, physics and philosophy have been sent to me by sunlight, due to my history in the past of having raised my hand to the sun, at a local woodland where I used to live.

Why is that something in the first place?
What is the greenery, that people call nature as a unit?



It's a context of freedom, which I used to the full extent.
The full extent, is the literal in this case.


Reaching out to the sun is a measurement.
(for Janice, from Annabelle Creation).


Is it anti-climactic, for the sun to use trade, as a sociology?

[Sculptor]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

We are embodied. There are no chains.
The only freedom from our bodies is death.

[RCSaunders]

... empirical science has been unable to explain the origin of life and consciousness ...

And you know they had an origin how?

[RCSaunders]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

We are embodied. There are no chains.
The only freedom from our bodies is death.

That's right. The only freedom that matters is freedom to use are bodies as we choose. Our life exists as the attribute of our bodies as living organisms, and our conscious minds exist as attributes of our life, so without the body there is nothing, no life, no mind, no freedom.

[bahman]

What I meant, by reactionary isolation, is the laws of nature unit of nature grabbing the bodies of reality, as a taking.

The problem, with the second issue, is that it is about my own experience of reality being expected to translate itself onto the general.

The general: it is the means of assembly of mean. This is middle (means) using the reward objective (assembly).

What is "mean", the last part of the aforementioned chronology?

It is the objective to assimilate intent with product

For Hugh Grant

I cannot understand what you are talking about.

To explain what it is that I mean, I'll need you to take a leap of faith with me:

It's my belief, that over the past two years, physics and philosophy have been sent to me by sunlight, due to my history in the past of having raised my hand to the sun, at a local woodland where I used to live.

Ok.

Why is that something in the first place?
What is the greenery, that people call nature as a unit?

What are the answers to these questions and how they are related to the topic?

It's a context of freedom, which I used to the full extent.
The full extent, is the literal in this case.


Reaching out to the sun is a measurement.
(for Janice, from Annabelle Creation).


Is it anti-climactic, for the sun to use trade, as a sociology?

What do you mean?

[bahman]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

We are embodied.

What do you mean?

There are no chains.

Of course, there are. Don't you believe in the laws of nature?

The only freedom from our bodies is death.

So you are a robot. Can't you choose what you don't like?

[bahman]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

We are embodied. There are no chains.
The only freedom from our bodies is death.

That's right. The only freedom that matters is the freedom to use our bodies as we choose. Our life exists as the attribute of our bodies as living organisms, and our conscious minds exist as attributes of our life, so without the body, there is nothing, no life, no mind, no freedom.

So you believe that you are free given the fact that your body acts based on laws of nature? How do you know that there is life after death? Have you ever been dead? Have you ever talked with the dead?

[Sculptor]

We are free. We however only can affect reality when our bodies are in undecided states. Otherwise, our bodies behave according to the laws of nature.

We are embodied.

What do you mean?

There are no chains.

Of course, there are. Don't you believe in the laws of nature?

The only freedom from our bodies is death.

So you are a robot. Can't you choose what you don't like?

Nothing you say makes sense.
Robots are not alive, so cannot die.
please demonstrate the chains, and how you think you can lose them.

[trokanmariel]

I cannot understand what you are talking about.

To explain what it is that I mean, I'll need you to take a leap of faith with me:

It's my belief, that over the past two years, physics and philosophy have been sent to me by sunlight, due to my history in the past of having raised my hand to the sun, at a local woodland where I used to live.

Ok.

Why is that something in the first place?
What is the greenery, that people call nature as a unit?

What are the answers to these questions and how they are related to the topic?

It's a context of freedom, which I used to the full extent.
The full extent, is the literal in this case.


Reaching out to the sun is a measurement.
(for Janice, from Annabelle Creation).


Is it anti-climactic, for the sun to use trade, as a sociology?

What do you mean?

Thank you, for your response.

A general outlook, on history, is satisfaction through inversion. Inversion, is meeting the end without having to go through the means. Now, assuming that throughout history, living matter has not been able to accommodate the origins of creation, meaning that the make-up of biological life's framework was too funny to be accepted, it's a rational exposure of history that living matter conducted an impossible trade of identities, in order to stop the environment from explaining the origin of creation.

Ten years ago, around 2011 and 2012, I was heading out to my local woodland, near 4 Woodhall Road; the image, of the sun that defined my view was just over the fence, of houses that bordered the woodland.

Sometimes, performing the hand raise was terrifying, others it was second nature.

Let's deconstruct that last statement:
the macro projection, of attribute onto the experience is the benefit of reflection.

The macro projection: its meaning, is that the trade of identities framework which underpins all nature is able to have an audience.

I said previously, that sunlight had sent physics and philosophy to me. They've come in the form of deity identities. And I spend each day performing a new brave act - analysing the murder of myself.

It may be a false interpretation, of what has happened. Maybe sunlight had nothing to do with the sending, though the sending has definitely happened.
It does make sense, however. At least in the context of biological creation's inability to be accounted for being the meaning of the environment's battle with living matter.

Speaking of battle, I have a friend, Alex Cross.
In general, I believe that I have a relay magic system, within my interior. For a time, I would listen to music, and constantly relay Alex Cross's press conference stare at Kate McTiernan, from Kiss the Girls (to Shelia Mite's wonder).
Perhaps, the trade of identities impossibility, if stabilized through the certification, of the hand raise gesture to the sun, can mean that Morgan Freeman's ghost version of Alex Cross can be a real entity from before the ages of the universe.

[bahman]

We are embodied.

What do you mean?

There are no chains.

Of course, there are. Don't you believe in the laws of nature?

The only freedom from our bodies is death.

So you are a robot. Can't you choose what you don't like?

Nothing you say makes sense.

They will make sense.

Robots are not alive, so cannot die.

I mean robot in the sense that you are not free.

please demonstrate the chains, and how you think you can lose them.

Do you believe in the laws of nature? If yes, then it means that your material body function according to the laws of nature. The laws of nature however are deterministic meaning that given one state of affair you always get a unique state of affair afterward. These laws make a one-to-one correspondence between one state of affairs and another one. In the real world, there are however cases in which we face options. That is when the system cannot evolve any further and a decision is required to be made, in other words, the system halts. Why? Because there are at least two options available in such a situation and laws of nature are determined meaning the system can only evolve according to laws of nature when there is a chain of causality, the chain of causality being, a set of states of affairs which one state uniquely defines another state of affair. Of course, it must be clear that a system that follows the laws of nature cannot evolve further when there are options available. In real life, we can overcome halt problem by making a decision. The decision however cannot be due to the body since the body act according to the laws of nature. That is when the free mind intervenes and resolves the conflict of interest in the options so we can choose one option and move along.

[bahman]

To explain what it is that I mean, I'll need you to take a leap of faith with me:

It's my belief, that over the past two years, physics and philosophy have been sent to me by sunlight, due to my history in the past of having raised my hand to the sun, at a local woodland where I used to live.

Ok.

Why is that something in the first place?
What is the greenery, that people call nature as a unit?

What are the answers to these questions and how they are related to the topic?

It's a context of freedom, which I used to the full extent.
The full extent, is the literal in this case.


Reaching out to the sun is a measurement.
(for Janice, from Annabelle Creation).


Is it anti-climactic, for the sun to use trade, as a sociology?

What do you mean?

Thank you, for your response.

A general outlook, on history, is satisfaction through inversion. Inversion, is meeting the end without having to go through the means. Now, assuming that throughout history, living matter has not been able to accommodate the origins of creation, meaning that the make-up of biological life's framework was too funny to be accepted, it's a rational exposure of history that living matter conducted an impossible trade of identities, in order to stop the environment from explaining the origin of creation.

Ten years ago, around 2011 and 2012, I was heading out to my local woodland, near 4 Woodhall Road; the image, of the sun that defined my view was just over the fence, of houses that bordered the woodland.

Sometimes, performing the hand raise was terrifying, others it was second nature.

Let's deconstruct that last statement:
the macro projection, of attribute onto the experience is the benefit of reflection.

The macro projection: its meaning, is that the trade of identities framework which underpins all nature is able to have an audience.

I said previously, that sunlight had sent physics and philosophy to me. They've come in the form of deity identities. And I spend each day performing a new brave act - analysing the murder of myself.

It may be a false interpretation, of what has happened. Maybe sunlight had nothing to do with the sending, though the sending has definitely happened.
It does make sense, however. At least in the context of biological creation's inability to be accounted for being the meaning of the environment's battle with living matter.

Speaking of battle, I have a friend, Alex Cross.
In general, I believe that I have a relay magic system, within my interior. For a time, I would listen to music, and constantly relay Alex Cross's press conference stare at Kate McTiernan, from Kiss the Girls (to Shelia Mite's wonder).
Perhaps, the trade of identities impossibility, if stabilized through the certification, of the hand raise gesture to the sun, can mean that Morgan Freeman's ghost version of Alex Cross can be a real entity from before the ages of the universe.

It seems to me that you had a spiritual experience which is kinda weird to me. I however don't understand the relation between your experience and the topic under discussion. It would be nice of you to elaborate.

[trokanmariel]

Ok.


What are the answers to these questions and how they are related to the topic?


What do you mean?

Thank you, for your response.

A general outlook, on history, is satisfaction through inversion. Inversion, is meeting the end without having to go through the means. Now, assuming that throughout history, living matter has not been able to accommodate the origins of creation, meaning that the make-up of biological life's framework was too funny to be accepted, it's a rational exposure of history that living matter conducted an impossible trade of identities, in order to stop the environment from explaining the origin of creation.

Ten years ago, around 2011 and 2012, I was heading out to my local woodland, near 4 Woodhall Road; the image, of the sun that defined my view was just over the fence, of houses that bordered the woodland.

Sometimes, performing the hand raise was terrifying, others it was second nature.

Let's deconstruct that last statement:
the macro projection, of attribute onto the experience is the benefit of reflection.

The macro projection: its meaning, is that the trade of identities framework which underpins all nature is able to have an audience.

I said previously, that sunlight had sent physics and philosophy to me. They've come in the form of deity identities. And I spend each day performing a new brave act - analysing the murder of myself.

It may be a false interpretation, of what has happened. Maybe sunlight had nothing to do with the sending, though the sending has definitely happened.
It does make sense, however. At least in the context of biological creation's inability to be accounted for being the meaning of the environment's battle with living matter.

Speaking of battle, I have a friend, Alex Cross.
In general, I believe that I have a relay magic system, within my interior. For a time, I would listen to music, and constantly relay Alex Cross's press conference stare at Kate McTiernan, from Kiss the Girls (to Shelia Mite's wonder).
Perhaps, the trade of identities impossibility, if stabilized through the certification, of the hand raise gesture to the sun, can mean that Morgan Freeman's ghost version of Alex Cross can be a real entity from before the ages of the universe.

It seems to me that you had a spiritual experience which is kinda weird to me. I however don't understand the relation between your experience and the topic under discussion. It would be nice of you to elaborate.

First, I want to say that your first sentence is nice. The addition of weird to me is a fast addition.

My disposition, right now in the universe, is that I am under the influence. By demonic forces. The reason, why I say demonic forces, is because of the principle of the level playing field not being used by the forces in question. But then, what is the level playing field?

The LPF, is entailing the same consequence, from the identical trade. The forces that govern me, are able to understand my inspiration, yet they don't have to entail the same consequence.

After May 28th, of this year, the universe will have undergone a radical shift; again, I need you to take a leap of faith with me.


After May 28th, it is my hope, that metaphor intelligence becomes accessible.

From the previous publication, of my discourse with you, I have spoken to the forces that govern me. I addressed the past, the history between myself and them. In particular, I addressed The House of Bley. Is it a fictional house?

Irrespective, of whether it's a fictional house, the issue and theme of the house stands. Which is the issue of body creation.

In today's reality, of Earth, people have the science of body but not the philosophy of body. Granted, a general diagnosis, but a logical follow-up to the context of the House of Bley.

You asked, about the topic of hand. Being chained to bodies.
It's the fact of history, of both the universe's history and pre-universe history that body creation matters. And not because of evolution.
In general, it's my disposition, in the universe, that the forces that govern me are interested in the outcome of the body creation debate.

I myself am interested, in the symmetry framework of mysteries. The mystery of words, of technology and living matter. Now, whether that was how I was able to routinely put my hand up to the sun, is a mystery.

The forces, that govern me are ostensibly interested in the who owns materialism debate? Which makes sense. Materialism is to be used by living matter, but it is non-living matter. Ergo the debate-system.

My general philosophy, about humanity in the modern era, is that people are supposed to be assembly-owners. And by assembly, I mean the framework of mysteries.

People are supposed to be owners, of the macro data puzzle, to give one example, which is an assembly-construct in which any final frame of data is indecipherable.

What is it, the construct of me asking you to take a leap of faith with me?

Does this construct have a voice? Does it have a visual? Can it itself raise its hand to the sun?

For Samantha Worzeil.