NEP type 2 Question

[HakutoRei000]

So a principle is stated as being the primordial state of existence in which with other principle predate the physical reality.


Then the world came to be as boundaryless, chaotic, primordial darkness.


Then become void of nothingness as the stillness in which reality is carved upon.


From these two principle concepts were derived, dimension (spatial and temporal) is derived, and law is established, thus become the physical and material world.


Given that nothingness itself is presented as a later-derived state originating from this primordial condition, would it be reasonable to infer that the principle is not merely nonexistent, but exists prior to the distinction between existence and nonexistence altogether, potentially qualifying for Nonexistent Physiology Type 2 (Idealistic Nonexistence)?

 

[HakutoRei000]

Bumppo

 

[Apotheosis69]

Given that nothingness itself is presented as a later-derived state originating from this primordial condition, would it be reasonable to infer that the principle is not merely nonexistent, but exists prior to the distinction between existence and nonexistence altogether, potentially qualifying for Nonexistent Physiology Type 2 (Idealistic Nonexistence)?

If it is beyond the distinction of Existence and Nonexistence. Yes that would be Nonexistent Physiology (Type 2)

 

[HakutoRei000]

If it is beyond the distinction of Existence and Nonexistence. Yes that would be Nonexistent Physiology (Type 2)

What if the distinction exist because it was derived from it?

 

[Apotheosis69]

What if the distinction exist because it was derived from it?

It still isn't governed by that distinction right? If it isn't governed, then it is Type 2. Cus it isn't bound by the duality of (non)existence

 

[HakutoRei000]

It still isn't governed by that distinction right? If it isn't governed, then it is Type 2. Cus it isn't bound by the duality of (non)existence

Ah okay thanks

 

[HakutoRei000]

It still isn't governed by that distinction right? If it isn't governed, then it is Type 2. Cus it isn't bound by the duality of (non)existence

Sorry, another question.

1. If something exists beyond the distinction of existence and non-existence, but is itself part of a larger structure that is also beyond the distinction of existence and non-existence, would that disqualify the lower structure from having Nonexistent Physiology? Or would both still qualify, with one simply being more fundamental than the other?
2. How do we assume that something also lacks an aspects?


Thank you.

 

[Apotheosis69]

Sorry, another question.

1. If something exists beyond the distinction of existence and non-existence, but is itself part of a larger structure that is also beyond the distinction of existence and non-existence, would that disqualify the lower structure from having Nonexistent Physiology? Or would both still qualify, with one simply being more fundamental than the other?

No, since that doesn't just make them a part of that distinction in the first place. The other is just more encompassing

2. How do we assume that something also lacks an aspects?

Has to be stated, or if said aspects are explained to be fundamental to existence.

Let's say, everything is made of information/data. A nonexistent structure of the same verse would have a nonexistent-version of Information/Data

 

[HakutoRei000]

No, since that doesn't just make them a part of that distinction in the first place. The other is just more encompassing


Has to be stated, or if said aspects are explained to be fundamental to existence.

Let's say, everything is made of information/data. A nonexistent structure of the same verse would have a nonexistent-version of Information/Data

Alright thanks!