>tfw you grasp the formless which can not be defined but from which all distinctions arise
>The formless real. No thisness, thatness, form, predicate, objecthood, logic, or structure. It cannot be defined, because definition already requires drawing a distinction. The first emergence of form is distinction, and distinction is identical with the birth of identity: to be something is to be distinguished as this rather than that. Objects are therefore not primitive substances or bundles of abstract properties; they are stabilized patterns of differentiation, identities that persist enough to be identified. The objects are real as emergent differentiations, but the set is not an additional object alongside them; it is a conceptual grouping imposed over real objects. Logic, information, mathematics, and formal language are downstream from this process: they are stabilized symbolic practices built from distinction, not Platonic structures or divine conceptions, but eternal manifestation of differentiation.
>>18523886>>18523893How do they arise? Why?Almost as if the formless indifference is utterly despicable to itself. Why else would this otherness emerge? Why does the Yawning Chasm open? Why does Ymir melt? Why does Atum wake? Why does Ammon shatter silence? Why was formlessness not enough? Why did that God will to die?
>>18523886>>18523893>Cringe and verbose LLM slopThose who speak do not know etc. Objects are false but you're still stuck with them and blathering about it doesn't change that.
>>18524388>>Cringe and verbose LLM slop >Those who speak do not know etc.I agree. And Ive been dealing with this stuff for 10 years being directly harassed by people with sophisticated quantum technology and I roll my eyes at the kind of post from people who just want to drone on and on.Things do need form, or else they would not need that which is formed and structured to communicate.There's more multiple ideas of formless. There's a structure in which things exist that has no particular form but operates in a different way so who is to say it has no form?And then there is that which has become formless that is desperately trying to become formed once more. It's what happens when people want to pretend like there aren't multiple layers to all of our problems.Blah blah
>>18523886https://www.ssssahitya.org/discourses/1975/the-basic-error
>>18524388>Objects are false but you're still stuck with themYou're not stuck with them. Pure lambda calculus allows the complete description without nouns (data structures) or even numbers. Note that there is no ontology where you get nouns but no verbs, but pure processes with no nouns is possible.
