[MD] What is SOM?

[Ham Priday]

Ron --

> In Eastern thought, logic begins with one. One and not one,
> they contend that they are three.
>
> What are your thoughts on this?

Instead of Western logic, the Eastern mystics use koans to "shock" the 
intellect toward "higher" insight.  The only sense I can make of the 
conclusion that One and not one are "three" is that we are dealing with 
three terms: One, not-one, and two.  But, of course, this tells us nothing 
we didn't already know.  Indeed, the sum might as well be "four"-- or even 
"five"-- since One is also "unity" and its division gives us "difference".

The Oneness of the primary source is not a mathematical integer, such as can 
be applied to relational logic, but an essence with the potentiality to 
actualize difference.  Essence is the very antithesis of relations and is as 
different from multiplicity as nothingness is from any number.  My theory is 
that actualized existence is a "reduction" of Essence that comes into being 
by negation.

I'll offer an analogy.  Let's say that the whole of existence is an 
infinite, homologous and undifferentiated entity.  In its primary state it 
is not an "object" because there is no "subject" to perceive it.  But let's 
imagine that a hole occurs in this entity.  That hole must be nothingness, 
since Essence represents everything that is.  Now you have two 
contingencies: the Whole and Nothing.  And you have established the 
metaphysical basis for difference.  If the Whole is ultimate reality and the 
nothingness is sensible awareness, you also have the basis for 
subject/object existence.

What puts the hole on Essence?  As there is no other agent in my analogy, 
its cause has to be Essence itself.
Essence negates nothingness to actualize appearance.  Negation doesn't occur 
in space and time; it is the metaphysical principle of absolute 
potentiality.

Does that help, Ron?

Thanks for the opportunity.

Best regards,
Ham



> Ham:
> In logic (and metaphysics) difference begins with two.  Experiential
> existence is actualized as a dichotomy of two exclusive but mutually
> dependent contingencies: Subjective (valuistic) Awareness and Objective
> Otherness.  This dichotomy establishes a metaphysical basis for the
> experience of difference and the proprietary cognizance of a
> multiplistic
> world.  We don't need to block out what we experience into so many
> levels
> and patterns, stages and periods, quanta and macro events, etc., in
> order to
> relate finitude to its absolute, undivided source.
>
> Ron: