Konflikt - as a root philosophy.

[encode_decode]

If each self has a oneness at root, that’s a multiplicity - which is a contradiction.

What if all the required oneness is there to begin with? There would be no multiplicity just things that take part in the oneness. Couldnt the oneness be infinite?

If duality is a principle then it could be that it is the oneness that is contrasting each thing.

I am not necessarily disagreeing - just trying to understand.

So if I say instead that all totality is; is a fundamental substance(lets call the substance “strings”); when there is nothing but strings then the full state of oneness is zero; because no matter how many times you add zero you still get zero. Then when something is configured with strings then it becomes a contrasting figure against the rest of totality. Duality enters the picture to begin with through this first creation. If this is to be true then there are other principles that have to be for things to configure in the first place - maybe attraction of strings.

Maybe the primordial principles(strings) are consuming and producing. I know the cosmic blender is just a device to present an idea as are some of the devices I have created in this post but it does make me wonder how it can be that the fundament became separated from the rest of totality in the first place. Are you saying the blender sits inside nothing? and you have taken everything inside the said nothing and put it inside a blender. Where did the blender come from?

This is more a curiosity than anything.

[Amorphos]

Couldn’t the oneness be infinite?

Indeed it would be without measure. Existence itself is not like that though. This is why most ancients considered a spiritual origin and that material existence comes after that, and is an illusion ~ because what is one is not multiple amd what is multiple is divided and not whole.

If duality is a principle then it could be that it is the oneness that is contrasting each thing.

Interesting. comparison would then perhaps manifest existence. Makes sense.
Kind of like when you contrast things in your mind it highlights them, makes one distinct from another.

I know the cosmic blender is just a device to present an idea as are some of the devices I have created in this post but it does make me wonder how it can be that the fundament became separated from the rest of totality in the first place. Are you saying the blender sits inside nothing?

Yes, we could say with respect to your outlined idea above, that the blender is the act of comparison, contrast, an observer observing an observer who exists because an observer is observing another element in the comparative/contrast.

Perhaps if you do that once it then explodes as a myriad of iterations of that process and you get universe.

There has to be the faculty or property of observing, which itself requires an act of duality. One of splitting the oneness in two such to gain the given perspective needed to observe.

Where did the blender come from?

Well, as above, but yes there has to be a duality to begin with. Thinking about this I can only conceive that reality itself at its most fundamental, is observation. This would explain why existence and eternal repetition of universe. if something is ‘looking’, then by default it has to be looking at something. Then it just so happens that everything is there to be looked at.

So in a way we have to reverse the whole blender thing, then imagine that everything is already blended, then that the observer makes a contrast simply by virtue of being an observer, and things then begin to exist [get observed].

Thereafter is relativity and qm, an act of observing itself changes that which it observes.

Can you imagine if the whole of existence is a misperception. The observer looks at nothing, sees something, and then something else exists lol

_