That answers thinking that runs into the same error as those who say “self does not equal other, because I’m not guilty of the same sins as the other”.
Also… gleaned from several discussions… 
to be // valuer
to exist/act // valuing
to value // value
to be // existor/actor
to exist/act // existing/acting
to value // existence/action
to be // being
to exist/act // being
to value // being
self=other
(every self is an other to another self, every other is a self to itself)
What is a self? What is an other?
A self/other is a being/valuer/actor who is/values/acts according to or out of alignment with its being/value(s)/act(s).
self=other is within a whole, as well…
ternary
tao/dao
What came first… the body… its actions… or its objectives (functions)?
How did objectives precede body/action if, in order to function, there need be a being and acting? How did being precede the acting/objectives if, in order to be, there must be active function? How did acting precede being/objective if action needs functional being?