[MD] Reet and the Weakest Link

[Ham Priday]

 Ron:

> Which is it as it applies to being-aware?
> you just stated that A is both dependant and exclusive.
> Analytics demands you make a choice, if you do not,
> the statement is false by that standard, if you say they
> are exclusive and they do not occur at the same time
> and they have no outcomes in common then it is a true
> dichotomy.
> if you say they are dependant and not mutually exclusive
> then that is a false dichotomy. But you do say that
> being-aware is dependant, therefore it is a false dichotomy.

I found this Internet definition of Dichotomy which may help resolve our 
logical problem:

"Dichotomies of opposition are used more in analysis, and where the two 
elements are often destructive when combined. (Exclusive OR). Dichotomies of 
complementarity are used more in synthesis, where the two elements are seen 
as parts of a whole with the whole emerging when the parts join - (Inclusive 
OR) - with the final whole being the universe of discourse."

I think you will agree that my AB proposition is a "synthesis" rather than 
an "analysis", which allows for "the whole emerging when the parts join.".
Therefore, if I withdraw the "exclusivity" condition, it would appear that 
my dualism is a "dichotomy of complementarity." -- an "inclusive OR" as 
opposed to an "exclusive OR".

Since nothing was stated about "true" or "false" in this description, I 
assume that a dichotomy of complementarity is valid by the standards of 
logic.  Which means that I can still refer to the relation of Awareness to 
Beingness as a dichotomy.

Are we back on track?

Regards,
Ham