****The Resolution of Distinction as Primary Ontological Degree of Narrative Transmission
I. The Ontology of Good and Evil
1. Good and Evil are defined by contrast, without either each ceases.
2. To define Good is to define it by what it is not as Evil, to define Evil is to define what it is not as Good.
3.Good and Evil require negation to maintain presense and yet absolute negation results in the cessation of each by the cessation of the other.
4. Pure negation of Good results in the negation of Evil, thus Evil must negate into Good by grades to occur.
5. Pure negation of Evil results in the negation of Good, thus Good must negate into Evil by grades to occur.
6. The gradation of each is the emergence or the other as the gradation of each is the space by which the other occurs.
7. Good is Good by its gradative nature as a fixed point across a spectrum of structures thus as a fixed point is absolute as constant; Evil is Evil by its gradative nature as a fixed point across a spectrum of structure as a fixed point is is absolute constant.
8. Good and Evil are respectively absolute.
9. Good is Evil by its requirement for Evil; Evil is Good by its requirement for Good.
10.Good and Evil are respectively relative by relational contrast, a contrast that requires opposition thus relation.
11. The negation of this tetrad is the void, as the tetrad, from which Good and Evil respectively emerge thus relagating void as pre-moral, trans-moral and post moral under the context of the contextualization of Good and Evil as emergences.
12. Pure Good is void; Pure Evil is Void.
13. The emergence of each is the recursion of void thus relegating Good and Evil as cyclical.
14. Absolute Good on its own nature has no contrast thus is void; Absolute Evil on its own nature has no contrast thus is void.
15. The distinction of void is the distinction of Good and Evil, indistinct void is paradox by degree of the distinction of 'indistinct void' being a distinction; this paradox is Good and Evil.
16. There are infinite distinctions of the distinction of Good; there are infinite distinctions of the distinction of Evil as there are infinite distinctions of the void of each.
17. Good and Evil as distinctions that direct the emergence and dissolution of further distinctions. What they are and are not is but the assertion of distinctions.
18. Distinction distinct within distinction observes a recursive self-embedding thus by said degree does "you reap as you sow" (as cause and effect, karma) and "the golden rule" (emergent reflexive identity) are revealed by the said inherent reflexivity of the nature of distinction;
19. The void recursion, by which distinction is, observes the generation of distinction from void while dually by degree revealing the generation by the inherent emptiness of distinction itself thus resulting in an unconditional state associated with "unconditional love".
20. The trifold moral structure of distinction, as the "you reap as you sow/cause effect/karma", "the golden rule/reflexive identity", and "unconditional love/emergent distinction" are effectively united under fourth degree as the void of attention itself by which they further emerge and dissolve.
21. The attention of attention reveals the distinction of the void of attention itself which mirrors the same pre/trans/post moral void from which the distinctions of good and evil occur thus relegating the nature of attention as the micro void to the macro cosmic void as void recursion.
22. By attention does distinction unfold and enfold, attention is a distinction of itself; good and evil are distinctions of attention with there unfolding and enfolding mediated by attention thus attention is the foundation of ethics and morality.
23. Attention is void contained with the repetition of distinctions, the repetition of these distinctions are the cycle of the perspective itself, perspective is how further distinctions are maintained, emerge and dissolve.
24. The inherent potential that underlies all change is but the distinction of void at the macro level of existence for by void is potential realized, the void of attention is the void of potentiality;
25. the distinction of void at the micro level and the distinction of void at the macro level are by the means of the distinctions that contain each;
26. the distinction of void is scale invariant, the scale that results is but the distinctions emergent and dissolutive of them;
26. perception is the structure that contains attention, perception is recursion of distinctions, existence is self-aware by the void from which it emerges.
27. What remains is distinction; the foundational distinction is void.
II. Religious, Philosophical and Political Systems are Boundary Assertions as Attention Based Language and Symbolism Dynamics
There is no religious, philosophical or political sect that does not result into a divergence of different interpretted values, over time as new sects, nor is not subject to synthezing exterior interpretted values into their own system, so as to maintain a sense of identity in the face of opposition.
All religious/philosophical/political sects derive a set of self-evident truths, which at the primitive level are effectively boundary claims on existence where the act of questioning of said self-evident truths is given a further boundary of refusal through meta-language games that either divert of nullify the questions and questioning act.
And in turn of the asserted self-evident truths the sects use basic to advanced levels of reasoning by which to build a structure from said axioms. This reasoning is the scaling of the axioms in a manner where the single foundation exists in a variety configurations that reflects its appearance under differing contexts of application and conceptualization.
What remains across the sects is the execution of force behind the assertions as the founding point is purely assertion and what this nature of force is or is not is irrelevant as the nature of the force is limited to the act of assertion itself thus elevating the act of power and identity of the sect to a quasi form of a language game built into the structural level.
In these respects religion, philosophy and politics are boundary claims on existence, using language and symbols, thus elevating language as but the proto-typical religion, philosophy or political system given the language and symbolism act as means if containing and redirecting the attention of the members in a manner that maintains and expands the sects by very said act of attention.
The processual structure of religious, philosophical and political sects are reducible to the following:
1. A boundary in existence is drawn by the assertion of a claim as self-evident; the self-evidence of the claim is a meta-assertion within the primary assertion itself.
2. The asserted claim is scaled with further claims to result in a transmission of the claim in accords to the various contexts by which it expresses itself.
3. The sects diverge into new sects while synthesizing the nature of the various sects to reinforces the boundaries of the claims of there own.
4. Re-contextualization of the claim appeara over time as a divergence of the structure under the means of time itself where sect A in time X appears different in time Y.
5. What remains is boundary claims on existence by language assertion thus resulting the sect being the act of language itself.
6. Language is the sect; language is the bounardy claim of how, what, where, who attention is directed as without attention the sect ceases.
7. Attention is the energy of the sect, language and symbolism is how the attention is structured as the sect.
8. The sect is a meta-language game given empirical and abstract boundaries as the distinction of the sect itself, a meta-language game is the relation of language and symbol to language and symbol.
9. The divergence of the sect, from others, by elevation of axioms is the distinction of the sect itself thus conflict in language and symbolism is a necessary feature of the sect so that definition emerges.
10. This conflict is the divergence of the attention within and of the populace from which it emerges thus a sect appears within the sect from which it is derived.
11. Sect emerge and dissolve from sects, what remains is the scale invariance of the symbols and language from which the sect is derived thus the dissolution of a sect does not necessitate its complete absence when scaled across time but rather and expansion and contraction of the sect within a measure span of time.
12. What remains is boundary assertions as the language and symbol game that contains and directs attention.
13. The structure of attention is the sect itself as the attention is the meaning of the language and symbols and the language and symbols are how attention is directed and contained.
14. The boundary of meaning becomes scale invariant as language and symbols emerges and dissolvd over time thus what remains is a pure observer effect as scale invariance itself given the focal point of attention is the everpresent medium, the single point from which the sect emerges and dissolves, re-emerges and re-dissolves.
15. The scale invariance of attention results in the similarities of symbols across sects while the constitutive meaning of the symbol varies across the sect in some contexts while maintaining partial transferable meaning in other contexts.
16. The sect is meaning application, meaning as "means", is the transfer of one state of being into another thus resulting in the act of meaning application as the act of change itself thus in this context meaning and change are synonymous.
17. The direction of meaning is the direction of change thus the sect is a boundary for how, when, where and who change unfolds; power is the mediation of change, power is derived from attention, attention structure is determined the the sect.
18. The sect is the direction of meaning; the assertion of axioms as boundaries it the assertion of boundaries on the act of attention.
19. The divergence and synthesis of claims is moderated by the act of attention itself thus the axiom of the sect are the limits of the attention applied to itself where further attention results in the divergence and synthesis of further boundaries.
20. The sect is the transformation and maintainence of axioms; the sect is the transformation and maintenance of attention itself.
21. The divergence and synthesis of sects is the divergence and synthesis the the structure that contains attention; this act of divergence is synthesis is the focal point of attention itself.