• Values
  • Questions


  • Andrius
  • Network

All Recent Changes

  • This website and
  • its participants'
  • writings are in the
  • Public Domain,
  • copyright-free.
  • Use them creatively!

edit SideBar


I've made good progress in my investigation, How are we one?

I wish for a culture of learning, growing, living forever, here and now. I asked:

  • How to foster such a culture?

and I found that this centered on:

  • How are we one?

I considered six kinds of oneness, and intuitively, what brings them together is a language for interacting heart-to-heart, and so I can ask, more intuitively:

  • How do we interact heart-to-heart?

I've made three conceptual breakthroughs in thinking about relevant structures:

  • A gradation of six unities... describes internal structure rather than external structure!
  • Six "qualities of signs", pairs of four levels of knowledge (of everything, anything, something, nothing)... circumscribe questions as complements to answers!
  • Six representations of anything... are a comprehensive set that grounds, around anything, a unity of the most comprehensive kind.

I'm writing up these results, trying to describe these three structures more completely and consider how the three are related. What do they contribute to a language for interacting heart-to-heart?

Generally, I think of us living by way of three conceptual languages:

  • Narration, how things happen, how we obey
  • Verbalization, how things get meaning, how we believe
  • Argumentation, how things come to matter, how we care

I suppose that a "language for interacting heart-to-heart" is the latter, but perhaps also relates to the other two.

Louis, in our last conversation you made a point that stayed with me, which is that with Name we have walked into the other side of the Tao. Technically, amongst my "divisions of everything", I make a distinguish between the "onesome" (Everything, the division of everything into one perspective) and the "nullsome" (God, the division of everything into No perspectives). The nullsome is the "inchoate" as you call it, the spirit, the chaos, the state of contradiction, the Tao, and then it is identified with its Self, manifested as structure, the onesome.

I realized that what Name does is to distinguish among opposites which one is the default, the "local", the subject of language. Prior to name, there is structurally no difference between "existing" and "not existing" as they are the same from God's point of view, they are simply words of no effect. Likewise, there is no difference between a cup and its complement, the remaining universe, as each defines the other. However, by naming the "cup" we are distinguishing it from its complement, we are circumscribing it, we are in fact allowing ourselves to isolate it and consider it within narrower scopes that destroy or diminish its complement. We do this because language is a contingency and most of what we are talking about need not be understood in any absolutely sense, as we say "this tree" and agree for practical purposes, although our conceptions of that tree and trees-in-general differ widely.

Language is why unity is important. Unity distills an entirety into an essence that we can localize, track, engage, reference and share through language. Language, with its tolerance for misunderstanding, is the framework whereby entirety can go beyond itself, into a wider public, even an ignorant public, as unity. Just as Martin Luther King Jr. says, "A healthy organization needs a wider movement", so a vibrant system needs a language.

I listened to a video of Gregory Chaitin where he notes how God seeks the greatest possible variety from the fewest possible laws. He notes that whatever those laws are, that Logos or Theory is, they have no pattern because otherwise there would be a simpler theory. And so, to him, pattern is that which is not interesting, whereas in the most elegant theory, each detail is a complete surprise, evoking beauty.

Gradation of six unities

Previously, I noted how I listed my questions about oneness, and grouped them in terms of God, Other, I/You, Love, Culture and Perspectives. I recognized them as a gradation that was key to my earlier work.

Intuitively, I recognized that these unities hold together disparate aspects without necessarily distinguishing them, describing them, demarking them, defining them or naming them. These unities are thus spirit rather than structure. I noticed that God is a headstrong God for whom being, doing, thinking are all one and the same, as well as being or not-being. In the case of the other unities, however, the unity may be less complete, and may unfold, much like the divisions of everything, but internally rather than externally, structurally, and thus they may complement the divisions of everything.

I consider God as a nullsome, an inchoate, a zeroth-person Who, a state-of-mind that we can take up, that we can identify with.

What is the unity of God? the notion, the name of God? "I am who I am". This is not a state-of-mind to take up, but rather, it is a name to keep in mind, it is a notion internal to us, a seed. It is an internal structure, a negative structure, that shuts down a perspective with a name, rather than opening it up as a window for us to look through.

I imagine that we can proceed internally with a series of names, that is, unities. I believe that these are complements to the divisions of everything. The sevensome is the logical square and it frames an eighth perspective, "All are good and all are bad", which defines the collapse of the system, so that it is empty and all things are true. Thus the eightsome is the nullsome. And we can think of each division of everything into perspectives as complemented by non-perspectives, which is to say, names, so that there are always eight perspectives and names in all.

Working backwards, I think of the sevensome as the "lacksome", or -1, what defines logic so that we can work with a self-standing opposite (such as truth) in a closed system. Such an opposite is a "division of everything into -1 perspectives" or perhaps simply, a name.

I imagine this proceeds as follows, with each unity a "name" for another unity.

  • "God" ("I am who I am) is the unity of God. "God" refers to the complete unity of doing, being, thinking, of being and not being. "God" is the -1some which as slack, as freedom, as goodness, complements the sevensome, the structure for logic, for system.
  • "Other" is the unity of "God", for God goes beyond himself into Other. Other is less than a complete unity because there is a partial distinction between what Other is and what Other will become, thus there is growth. "Other" is the -2some which complements the sixsome, the structure for morality, emotions and virtues.
  • "I/You" is the unity of "Other", for I/You (or simply, Person) mediates between God and Other. "I/You" is the -3some which complements the fivesome, the structure for decision-making, represented as space or time.
  • "Love" is the unity of "I/You", and the absence of God, the complement of God. "Love" is the -4some which complements the foursome, the structure of knowledge.
  • "Culture" is the unity of "Love", and the absence of Other, the complement of Other. "Culture" is the -5some which complements the threesome, the structure of participation.
  • "Perspectives" is the unity of "Culture", and the absence of I/You, the complement of I/You. "Perspectives" is the -6some which complements the twosome, the structure of existence.

I need to think through how the unity diminishes until with "Perspectives" there is a sixfold separation, a distinction of being, doing, thinking and of being or not being.

I'm very moved by the possibility of such a chain because it is something that I've naturally overlooked, for I've always focused on documenting "states of mind" that I can attest to, rather than looking at the external world or "names" and other tools for addresing it. But now the names arise in a very internal way, as internal structure, as non-perspectives, as shut windows. And the six form a chain that allows for no divergence and thus can be very helpful for participating in language when we want to be well anchored in a sea of nonsense. Indeed, I am familiar with this gradation as it arises in key structures, in particular, as the backbone of the eightfold way, but also in the Omniscope and as the sixsome. It is interesting that it can end with "Perspectives" because all of my structural work is based on expressing and relating perspectives, and so by descending through internal structure, through our gradation of inherent assumptions, we arrive at the definition for an external perspective, so that we emerge as if by a crosscap into the opposite world. And there we start assuming existence, the division of everything into two perspectives, which I work hard not to assume, but most people do, and is perhaps a natural working assumption in the language of life. Also, it is noteworthy that the two divisions (of the eight) which do not have and do not need complements are the nullsome and the onesome. Evidently, they do not need the framework of the eightsome, they do not need perspectives, nor do they need this chain of implicit assumptions.

We may consider the six unities as absolutes in that they are not cut off from their opposites, as is usually the case with concepts. And so they can serve as poles, as reference points for people's deepest values.

This internal chain of assumptions can I think help explain how we take up one perspective among several in a division of everything. I've never accounted for that, but have simply dealt with them as wholes, as entire states of mind. For existence you need two perspectives. But what does it mean to take up one of the two? And that is what language makes possible.

The six levels also remind me of the six layers in the cerebral cortex.

Recent Changes