Downgrade of Nonduality type 3 in the aspect of Absolution (Yin Tian Shen Yin)

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Exemple : proposition : Humans Exists

First possibility : ⊤ (True, they are existent)
Second possibility : ⊥ (False, they are Non-existent or ambiguous)

If Humans does not exist because they are ambiguous, Ambiguity is not a truth Value, it is just a state of Being, so the reponse in this case would be : (False, They does not exist, since they are ambiguous)

If humans don't exist, then they don't exist. There is nothing ambiguous about non-existence.

 

[Nexus_still_slams]

If humans don't exist, then they don't exist. There is nothing ambiguous about non-existence.

I expressed myself badly, what I wanted to say is that the proposition "Human exists" can be answered by "False, since they are ambiguous" (if ambiguity is not related to be existent or non-existent), then ambiguity is not a truth value but just an element of the verse outside the duality existence / Non-existence.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

I expressed myself badly, what I wanted to say is that the proposition "Human exists" can be answered by "False, since they are ambiguous" (if ambiguity is not related to be existent or non-existent), then ambiguity is not a truth value but just an element of the verse outside the duality existence / Non-existence.

If Ambiguity is outside of the duality of existence, and non-existence, then it is something outside of every form of duality and non-duality in the verse, which would make it Type 3.

 

[Georredannea15]

If Ambiguity is outside of the duality of existence, and non-existence, then it is something outside of every form of duality and non-duality in the verse, which would make it Type 3.

In the verse, being outside of duality and non-duality does not make type 3, no? We don't have such a standard.

 

[RaveeCPN]

Yeah, count me in. There seem to be only four logical states. At least that's all I could count

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

In the verse, being outside of duality and non-duality does not make type 3, no? We don't have such a standard.

existing in a state one can't describe using simple combinations of A and not A

Quite literally exactly what it means.

 

[Nexus_still_slams]

If Ambiguity is outside of the duality of existence, and non-existence, then it is something outside of every form of duality and non-duality in the verse, which would make it Type 3.

No, being outside of duality and non-duality is not type 3. And it's not a truth value, but juste something that is not part of the duality existence / not-existence. But even with that, it is possible to make proposition with only ⊤ and ⊥. For exemple "False, Human's are ambigous". This exemple does not need any additional Truth Value, and includes ambiguity.

 

[Nexus_still_slams]

No, being outside of duality and non-duality is not type 3. And it's not a truth value, but juste something that is not part of the duality existence / not-existence. But even with that, it is possible to make proposition with only ⊤ and ⊥. For exemple "False, Human's are ambigous". This exemple does not need any additional Truth Value, and includes ambiguity.

Plus, Being outside of the duality Existence / Non-existence is just being outside of Duality, not Non-duality, because a Nonduality can also be outside of existence and Non-existence

 

[RaveeCPN]

Quite literally exactly what it means.

Simple combinations of A and ¬A are already classical states of contradiction-allowing logic. But you don't have all the simple combinations of A and ¬A.

You only have;

• A
• ¬A
• Neither A or ¬A (The Void)
• And the Initial Flames, which are in a deeper state of existence than the Void

And that's not enough to make you a Type 3 Nondual.

 

[Georredannea15]

Quite literally exactly what it means.

Being outside of non-duality and duality does not give you any state of truth lol what? We have no such standard and have never given it a type 3

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

• Existence (A/1)
  • The Flame that scorched Chaos had created the concept of Existence.
• Non-Existence (¬A/0)
  • It still resembled Chaos that represented void, death and unpredictable future.
• Neither Existence (A/1) nor Non-Existence (¬A/0)
  • There was also a will wandering in the void, in the realm between existence and non-existence, letting out a grand and distant voice.
• Both Existence (A/1) nor Non-Existence (¬A/0)
  • Indeed, there was not even a clear boundary between existence and nothingness.

The Initial Flame cannot, be any of these states.

Being outside of non-duality and duality does not give you any state of truth lol what? We have no such standard and have never given it a type 3

Multi-Eternity, has Transduality Type 3, for transcending the In-Betweener, which is the divide between dualities.
The Dharmakaya, has Transduality Type 3, for being neither dual like the Yin and Yang, nor Non-Dual like Transcendent Monks, nor Outside of Duality.

 

[Georredannea15]

The Initial Flame cannot, be any of these states.

Multi-Eternity, has Transduality Type 3, for transcending the In-Betweener, which is the divide between dualities.
The Dharmakaya, has Transduality Type 3, for being neither dual like the Yin and Yang, nor Non-Dual like Transcendent Monks, nor Outside of Duality.

There is something you don't understand. In Marvel and journey of the west, non-dual beings and dualities already have a type 3 system and multiple truth states.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

There is something you don't understand. In Marvel and journey of the west, non-dual beings and dualities already have a type 3 system and multiple truth states.

Considering I'm the one who added Journey to the West Verse to the wiki, I would imagine I do.

Anyway, I'm not going to bother arguing over this since neither of us will budge. I'll come back when some other staff are interested.

 

[Ziplak]

Put me for disagree

 

[Nexus_still_slams]

Put me for disagree

Why do you disagree ?

 

[Ben_CleverName]

The Initial Flame did not create the Void, and the Void is not made of Information, so Ambiguity can't refer to a state related to it.

Why would ambiguity be mentioned next to existence and non-existence, two things that have been explained time and time again, to be dualities, if not for the fact it was an additional state? That would literally make no sense.

Because that's how ambiguity works. Ambiguity is not explicitly defined to be either A or Not A. If it's ambiguous, it (generally) means that it's either-or, not "both or neither" or anything like that. Ambiguity allows for multiple possible outcomes but it doesn't assume that they all exist simultaneously or that the outcomes are part of some additional truth value like "A" that you're proposing.

I'm not saying there can't be/isn't in-verse context that suggests the term is used like that but I don't believe the scan hosted on Gyazo supports the notion of it existing as a third possible truth state. The passage looks poorly translated, so that's part of the problem to me, but it seems to be alluding more towards the topic of unknowns here.

 

[Fixxed]

Alright, I'm going to break down my argument since I was being lazy earlier.

---

• The Initial Flame created, everything, including the Concept of Existence and by extension, everything else. And we know, it created every form of existent, and non-existent duality because it's stated as much;

• So, it separated all existences and void, But, how do we know this includes dualities?

• Well, it's said that its differentiation, not only affected all things, but also all concepts. This created dualities like life and death, darkness and, light. But, that doesn't inherently mean their dualities, right? Well, as listed above, the Initial Flame differentiated order and chaos.

• Well, Chaos and Order are directly stated to be opposing poles, just like darkness and light, existing in a cycle. One represents balance, and the other is imbalance.

---

• Ok, so we know, the Initial Flame created duality. But what about things that are non-dual?

• Well, it's directly stated that the Initial Flame created, divisions and boundaries in the first place.

• And the Void is quite literally, what happens when all boundaries, borders, thresholds, divides, etc, disappear.

• So, the Void is quite literally non-dual. it is something that is neither, existent, nor non-existent, it has no dualities.

---

• Ok, so based on what we've covered. The Initial Flame created duality and the divisions between every form of dual concept. On the other hand, the Void is what happens when all concepts, dualities, and divisions are one, and is neither one nor the other. So, is the Initial Flame dual, or non-dual?

• Neither, the Initial Flame exists on a level, deeper than the Void. And since we already covered Duality and Non-Duality, there's only one last thing the Initial Flame could be.

• It is a plurality, something that 3 different states at the same time.

---

I will say for change the description/explanation in the profile

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

I will say for change the description/explanation in the profile

To what?

I'm not saying there can't be/isn't in-verse context that suggests the term is used like that but I don't believe the scan hosted on Gyazo supports the notion of it existing as a third possible truth state. The passage looks poorly translated, so that's part of the problem to me, but it seems to be alluding more towards the topic of unknowns here.

The only reason I'm saying Ambiguity must be a unique state of being is because there has been no other explanation for what exactly the Initial Flame is.

It's clearly not existence, since it made the concept, and it's also clearly not non-existence, since it created Chaos, which represents stuff like void. It can't be both, or neither, existence or non-existence, since those two non-dualities are considered to be a part of the Void, which predates the Initial Flame.

At the same time, the Initial Flame exists on a deeper level than the Void, so in my opinion, the only state it can be in, is a 3rd state. And the only 3rd state ever mentioned alongside Existence and Non-Existence is Ambiguity.

 

[Fixxed]

To what?

Because that not explain why existence and nonexistence "contain" all duality, like what you stated about life-death dark-light order-chaos

It not explain why the existence and nonexistence can be the 3rd and 4th truth state, so the ambiguity can be the 5th truth state

It just stated existence nonexistence and ambiguity, nothing more. It not explain the correlation about that and duality or truth state

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Because that not explain why existence and nonexistence "contain" all duality, like what you stated about life-death dark-light order-chaos

It not explain why the existence and nonexistence can be the 3rd and 4th truth state, so the ambiguity can be the 5th truth state

It just stated existence nonexistence and ambiguity, nothing more. It not explain the correlation about that and duality or truth state

Fair enough. So you agree with Type 3 as long as I make the explanation more in-depth?

 

[Fixxed]

Fair enough. So you agree with Type 3 as long as I make the explanation more in-depth?

Yeah

 

[Ben_CleverName]

The only reason I'm saying Ambiguity must be a unique state of being is because there has been no other explanation for what exactly the Initial Flame is.

It's clearly not existence, since it made the concept, and it's also clearly not non-existence, since it created Chaos, which represents stuff like void. It can't be both, or neither, existence or non-existence, since those two non-dualities are considered to be a part of the Void, which predates the Initial Flame.

At the same time, the Initial Flame exists on a deeper level than the Void, so in my opinion, the only state it can be in, is a 3rd state. And the only 3rd state ever mentioned alongside Existence and Non-Existence is Ambiguity.

Our interpretations seem to be kind of similar, so far. At the moment, I've interpreted "existence" to be describing the dualistic state of things, since the text describes the flame creating those distinctions along with the infinite possibilities and the like. "Non-existence" likewise appears to be the non-dualistic state of being, unless non-existence is contextually separate from the nothingness being referenced here:

Thus, fire was born from nothingness, its light illuminating the Void and separating all things and concepts...

If "nothingness" is indeed different from non-existence then I think that's worth establishing because it influences how we might interpret these statements and their relationship to the nondualistic ideas in the verse.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Our interpretations seem to be kind of similar, so far. At the moment, I've interpreted "existence" to be describing the dualistic state of things, since the text describes the flame creating those distinctions along with the infinite possibilities and the like. "Non-existence" likewise appears to be the non-dualistic state of being, unless non-existence is contextually separate from the nothingness being referenced here:

If "nothingness" is indeed different from non-existence then I think that's worth establishing because it influences how we might interpret these statements and their relationship to the nondualistic ideas in the verse.

Nothingness and Non-Existence are used pretty interchangeably from what I read.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

Nothingness and Non-Existence are used pretty interchangeably from what I read.

Would you then agree that "Nonexistence" is where things become nondualistic? Since, from what I can tell, "things" such as light and dark only seem to become separated and distinguished once they're put into "Existence", and in the Non-Existence" state they're treated as indistinguishable from each other? Basically, "Existence contains dualities while Non-existence contains no dualities"

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

Would you then agree that "Nonexistence" is where things become nondualistic? Since, from what I can tell, "things" such as light and dark only seem to become separated and distinguished once they're put into "Existence", and in the Non-Existence" state they're treated as indistinguishable from each other? Basically, "Existence contains dualities while Non-existence contains no dualities"

Yeah, when things are existent, they become separate and dualities, but while in the Void, they are all one and non-dual.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

Yeah, when things are existent, they become separate and dualities, but while in the Void, they are all one and non-dual.

And the concept of existence itself owes its being to the aforementioned Flame, which naturally assumes that the flame is the catalyst for this distinction between dualistic and non-dualistic states of being. The thing is, I don't really see what that would have to do with using Ambiguity as a third truth value here. I understand that the statement says the world was made from the information of existence, non-existence, and ambiguity, but that doesn't necessarily mean it has to be wholly separated from them like they are to each other. It's an ambiguous statement, ironically, but I would've interpreted the inclusion of "ambiguity" here as suggesting a sort of in-between state of the two, sort of like Schrödinger's cat, existing in both states at once yet not fully committing to either of them. That seems to more closely align with how the word "ambiguity" is used in general language.

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

here as suggesting a sort of in-between state of the two, sort of like Schrödinger's cat, existing in both states at once yet not fully committing to either of them. That seems to more closely align with how the word "ambiguity" is used in general language.

My point is that the Void is already described as being both the two states of existence and non-existence and in between them. If Ambiguity was meant to represent that in-between, then they could have just said, the Void. But the Void is not part of the world, nor information, and was not created by the Initial Flame, which makes me believe Ambiguity, has to be something else.

 

[Ben_CleverName]

My point is that the Void is already described as being both the two states of existence and non-existence and in between them. If Ambiguity was meant to represent that in-between, then they could have just said, the Void. But the Void is not part of the world, nor information, and was not created by the Initial Flame, which makes me believe Ambiguity, has to be something else.

The only scans that I've seen concerning the void are that it doesn't exist and that it's "between" existence and non-existence. The former confirms that the void is in a "non-existent" state but the latter doesn't confirm that it's also in an "existent" state. I don't think it's an unreasonable interpretation to assume "between" means that it's part of both in that sense, but it seems more like something people would want for supporting evidence than primary evidence. Honestly, without further context, I would assume the void itself exists in the "ambiguity" state due to it being "both" existent and non-existent. You've established why the Flame can't be in the states of existence or nonexistence, but is there anything confirming that the void can't be "ambiguous"? Is there anything else that establishes what exactly "ambiguity" is referring to besides it being mentioned alongside existence and non-existence?

 

[ActuallySpaceMan42]

You've established why the Flame can't be in the states of existence or nonexistence, but is there anything confirming that the void can't be "ambiguous"? Is there anything else that establishes what exactly "ambiguity" is referring to besides it being mentioned alongside existence and non-existence?

Well like I said earlier, the initial Flame didn't make the Void, so Ambiguity being a part of the Void, something that existed before the Initial Flame would be a bit backward.

As for what Ambiguity means, it could be referring to incomplete logic. The verse mentions a few times, that the world follows the concept of Incomplete Logic, and as such everyone who looks at it, only sees a fraction of what it really is. Then it's revealed that the true form of the world is the Initial Flame, which projects everything else.

Then, later on when a being transcends the world, and the Initial Flame, they are stated to transcend Incomplete Logic as well.

 

[Ziplak]

Why do you disagree ?

Actually put me for agree its missing the beings operating on a many valued logic system with five truth values. And the second quote is more indicative of type 2.

 

[Elizhaa]

I also disagree with the changes based on ActuallySpaceMan42's arguments.

 

[Georredannea15]

I also diagree with the changes based on ActuallySpaceMan42's arguments.

Actually the arguments are not really relevant to the ND standards we have right now, but anyway, I can open a more detailed downgrade to this in the future.

 

[Floxiaaa]

Agree

 

[Livinmeme]

Bump