There is only occurence. Thoughts, emotions, sensations, physical and abstract things are occurences. Existence is an occurence. All is an occurence. What one experiences as consciousness is an occurence with subjectivity and objectivity being rooted in occurence.
The basic assertion of “I think therefore I am” is rooted in the occurence of thought as a sense of self but may be broadened to a deeper more holistic statement of “occurence through occurence as occurence just is” where all aspects of experience are rooted in occurence.
If all is occurence and the reduction of all to a singular phenonemonon is an occurence, thus necessitating occurence is recursive alternation of occurence through itself as meta occurences of and within further occurences, where occurence is simultaneously transitional of one occurence to another as an occurence, this necessitates occurence as a universal law of existence that is self evident, by nature of all things being reduced to occurences, for self evidence is an occurence and nothing can be reduced to anything more foundational and universal than the absolute nature of occurence, with this absolute nature of occurence being that occurence is ever present, with any definition of occurence also being an occurence.
The recursive nature of occurence necessitates occurence as cyclically self maintaining while linearly progressively changing as it alternates through change thus necessitating a spiral of occurences that spontaneously occurs and dissolves.
Occurence is recursive and alternating by nature thus necessitating the foundations of experience following this same nature as experience is an occurence.
The deepest occurence is the symbol for the symbol acts as the empirical and abstract means of transforming awareness and awareness determines how reality is influenced or manifested. Symbols manifest fully as language, literally and metaphorically, as a symbolic directs to that which is beyond itself.
The occurence of language and symbols embodies the form of an expanding and contracting cycle of a self referencing variation of definitions, an intuitive circlular and linear duality that creates spiral of occurences which spontaneously occurs as a point of awareness. Simply follow definitions in a dictionary to see this.
In other terms the occurence of language, as the grounding of consciousness through the literal and metaphorical nature of relative symbols, has a fourfold intuitive geometric processive nature, which occurs, thus reflecting occurence itself:
Cyclical maintenance (one definition leads to another then the new definition leads back)
Linear progression (one definition leads to another then another so on and so forth)
Spiraling transitioning (expanding and contracting variations of self reference in definitions
Point of spontaneity (the word and it’s meaning just occurs)
This quadratic set of forms also determine how we process experience at the meta level of language, where the nature of experience being grounded in symbols necessitates the form and function of experience and language manifestation as fundamentally being interwoven.
One experience goes to another and the new experience cycles back to the old.
One experience leads to another than another than another linearly.
One experience is reinterpreted by another experience and a new experience occurs through a spiral.
One experience just spontaneously appears as a point of awareness.
Experience thus has a symbolic nature, empirically and abstractly, through immersion with forms or images which direct beyond themselves. This occurence of symbolic experience contains meta processes that are meta-symbolic experiences in themselves and follows a geometric paradigm intuitively. Symbolic experience is manifests intuitively through a line, circle, spiral and point. This fourfold geometric process influences itself:
The cycle is the maintenance of the symbolic experience. The cycle is manifested through the spiral as expanding or contracting self reference, through the line as the beginning and end cycle as new beginnings and ends, through the point that composes it and allows the spontaneous occurence of the cycle through it.
The line is the progression of the symbolic experience. The line is manifested through the spiral and cycle by a simple progression of one point to another and the point as composing both the line and the spontaneous occurence of the line.
The spiral is the transformation of the symbolic experience. The spiral is manifested through the circle as variations of self referentiality and the line observing progressive variation and the point composing it and manifesting the spiral spontaneously.
The point is the spontaneous occurence of the symbolic experience. The point composes these forms and these forms spontaneously occur from it. The point is the utmost paradox as both one and many points and limit and limitlessness.
The nature of occurence reflects through the basic paradigms by which reality is conceptualized as the conceptualization itself. Occurence manifests through a fourfold metaphysics of:
Monism which contains dualism.
Dualism which relates as monism.
Triadic which is the transitional synthesis of monism and dualism where one results in the other.
Quadratic which is the emptiness of all three.
Occurence has four identity laws which are the form and function of occurence as the nature of occurence itself, to speak of these “laws” would effectively observe the nature of occurence as an occurence within and through it. The following laws are:
1. Occurence.
2. The relationship of occurences.
3. The relationship being an occurence.
4. Occurence as empty, hence transitional.
Occurence occurs as distinction. Distinction simultaneously connects and seperates thus the grounding of paradox is distinction as not only a paradox is a distinction but the act of distinction, by means of simulatneous connection and seperation, is a paradox. A simple example is a circle, the circle is the space between the interior and exterior space as space between space as space. This space, the circle, connects and seperates the interior and exterior spaces simultaneously thus is paradoxical.
The occurence of reality through distinction is paradox and paradox is transitional given the paradox acts as a means of synthesis in one respect, where opposites result in a new phenomena, while dually allowing the refining of opposing phenomena by nature of there distinct contrasting natures. Transition is both refinement, by manifesting contrasting clarity, and creation, by creating a new state by nature of interrelated opposites. This transitional nature of occurence necessitates an occurence to manifest and dissolve through occurence, as one experiences things appearing and disappearing, and this results in occurence as fundamentally paradoxical as manifestation and dissolution are occurences thus the occurence alternates through itself and as such is dualistic by nature with this dualistic nature of occurence being an occurence. Occurence exists through alternation and this alternation is an occurence.
This dualism in and out of itself results in a further dualism where this alternation manifests a relationship to other occurences where the occurence simultaneously connects and seperates other occurences. For example a chair appears. The chair as distinct is seperate from the table next to it and this seperation results in a contrasting relationship which allows the chair to occur by standing apart from the table. However this contrast makes the chair dependent upon standing apart from table and this dependency results in a connective relationship.
From another respect the chair as distinct from the table, and vice versa, connects the qualities within the chair and table as the chair and table respectively by them being separated.
The occurence of the chair is simultaneously connected and separated from the table. All occurence simultaneously connects and seperates this is paradoxical as the relationship of simultaneous connection and seperation allows the occurence to transition and change. The change in one occurence affects the state of another and this change is context creation as the occurence itself.
Thus occurence is inseperable from paradox.
Occurence is it’s own context as well considering there is only occurence and as its own context it is fundamentally empty. An example of this can be the cornerless square paradox:
There is a square with infinite square within and outside of it. This boundless number of squares makes the square its own context while simultaeously leaving a blank void as there are infinite squares within and without thus no visible square. The perfect square is no square hence the square is merely a process of transition to another square and is empty as such, occurence is a process of transition and empty as such.
This is the nature of experience as experience is grounded in occurence.
All of this is an occurence.
Experience is inseperable from existence in many respects.
Existence occurs relative to another existence thus is the attribute that occurs by nature of a percieved relationship between phenomena that allow them to be. This percieved relationship exists as a percieved distinction.
Existence is an attribute within an attribute as an existing tree gives the relative leaf to it the quality of also existing with these existences merely being a conceptual distinction that occurse through a recursive fractal process of applied distinctions: this gains existence from that existence and that existence gains existence from another existence. To speak of existence, through existing things (such as words, symbols and concepts) is merely philosophical bootstrapping where the observation of attributes is inseperable from the form and function of existence.
Given the self-evidence of existence ‘being’, and the occurence of said self evidence ‘being’ as well with the relationship between the phenomena occuring and the self evidence of the phenenomena occuring with this relationship being an occurence, the self referential recursive quality of occurence through occurence as occurence by nature is a process of distinction that simultaneously connects and seperates the conceptualization of experience by nature of paradox and contradiction given the connection of occurences as an occurence creates an inherent unity of occurence while it dually allows for a degree of seperation from other occurences by nature of being distinct and localized.
Observing this in a simpler degree would be to see a tree as to connect experienced attributes such as bark and leaves into a cohesive localized reality while dually separating this very same tree from the field as a distinct localization of phenomena.
Unity under these terms, and in these respects, requires a paradoxical seperation from other occurences so as to achieve a sense of definition or distinction thus relegating distinction as synonymous to paradox by occurence.
Dually seperation allows for a percieved unity between and through occurences given the continual seperation of occurence results in a paradox of all things being connected by the quality of being distinct or localized considering that percieved differences between what occurs necessitates an underlying quality, ie being localized or a singleton, that connects amidst the seperation.
In these respects, to make a simple observation, both a tree and field are distinct from eachother and yet by their shared nature of contrast they are united under the quality of being distinct, of being localized. If everything is different than in specific respects that are the same by this underlying quality.
Occurence is simultaneously connection and seperation with connection and seperation being fundamental distinctions which occur. A paradox ensues by nature of these distinctions for to observe these would be to observe occurence through occurence as both seperate and united further resulting in a negation where neither distinction are seperate nor united. Occurence as connected to itself leaves it as self similar and effectively nothing due to lack of contrast. Occurence as seperate to itself leaves an absence of similarity to such an extent that it is effectively nothing due to lack of repeated distinctions.
The occurence of pure connection would be effectively nothing given no distinction would occur.
The occurence of pure seperation would be effectively nothing given no distinction would occur.
Pure connection and pure seperation effectively become one and the same in these regards as there is no distinction between each as both are effectively nothing. While opposites relativistically speaking they are same same by an absolute unchanging nature as purely connection and pure seperation are effectively nothing and there is nothing to change within nothingness for if there where it would not be nothingness.
Occurence as purely distinction leaves no contrast for distinction to be thus leaving it indistinct, nothing.
Occurence as purely nothing is a paradox as the absence thingness is a distinction of absence.
Occurence under these terms becomes its own absence of foundation and requires relation to achieve identity and yet if occurence is the irreducible reality of experience, and the unlimited apex of experience, than occurence by nature resorts to a fundamental reality of being synonymous in terminology and conceptualization to that of ‘paradox’ as occurence it’s its own context given there are no foundations but itself and the context by which it exists are mere recursive fractal much in the same manner of a metaphor of infinite spheres gaining context through eachother even though there is only a sphere in different states.
The paradox exhibits grades however as irreducibility is merely infinite reducibility where the continual process of reduction leaves nothing effectively reduced as the act of reduction is unchanged, dually an unlimited apex reflects continual progression in such a manner that progression itself does not progress as the act of progression is unchanging. Paradox under these terms is not limited to opposites but the process of infinite gradation that effectively eliminates change at a more central level as gradation is a constant function resulting in a static form by nature of being unchanging within a given context. An example of this would be human reproduction, generations may pass in innumberable variation and yet regardless of reproductive changes a human being still occurs across the expanse of time and space.
We experience by occurence, with experience being an occurence, and yet occurence reflects an inherent absurdity in purely an unjustified existence that is the act of justification itself for to exist is to justify by means of relations that are meta existences to what exists. Existence is justification by nature of its very occurence for justification is justified by occuring, thus leaving occurence as justification.
××××××××
Paradox becomes a rational aspect of experience given the simple distinction of connection and seperation it provides. To see a rational circle is to see a paradox of the space within and without the circle simultaneously connected and seperated by the circle itself where the rational form of the circle is the paradox itself. The basic law of identity follows this same paradigm as A=A leaves A defined by recursion and yet the nature of “=” connecting A to A by nature of self similarity while dually showing two distinct A that are not similar by nature of each being distinct. “Equality” is the limit by which connection through unifying similarity and seperation through separating distinctions.
Rational foundations of experience thus are the paradox, as both the beginning and end to things given a beginning and end are limits which provide distinction, where paradox observes reason as a justified distinction grounded in a justification that either lacks further justification or requires an indefinite regress to do so thus leaving a groundless infinity of potential and actual phenomena where spontaneity of occurence is the final say as to what is coherent and what is not as a before and after is made evident to some degree.
Spontaneity is the foundation by nature as reality just appears by virtue of unnecessary justification where justification occurs by occurence and yet is ungrounded by the mere effects of spontaneously induced change that leaves foundations as merely unnecessary, by virtue of inevitable looping regresses of cause, and yet it so nonetheless thus nullifying necessity as the sole justification for phenomena to occur.
In regards to seeking foundations occurence gives the impression of a subtle and deep, yet simple and obvious, approach to knowledge that both contains and moves beyond itself by virtue of “just being” as the change that relagates phenomena to being distinct is not only strictly movement but simultaneously leaves any notion of stability as merely an observation of different rates of change that enable the experience of a phenomena to occur, with this phenomena being an occurence and the experience of it an occurrence as well leaving change as not being an external experience but dually an internal one. In simpler terms a tree is merely a different rate of change from a field, thus leaving all distinctions as fundamentally being ratios in the conceptual sense where the ratio is the distinction of embodied connection and seperation which makes occurence synonymous to paradox. This nature of ratios of change, by virtue of being distinctions, leaving a process that is fundamentally static in nature given the process does not change: connection and seperation as inverse forms of unity. The foundations of what constitutes reason, ie conceptualized ratios of the various sorts, is akin to a sense of division and connection resulting in a holistic cycle in one respect and progressive change in another thus while occurence is dynamic the perpetual occurence of occurence is effectively static thus resulting in a deeper more nuanced paradox within the center of existence.
This progressive cycle of rationalizing occurence, as mentioned in the aforementioned ‘occurence through occurence as occurence’, necessitates an empty center within a symbolic revolving wheel of appearance where potentiality is the symbolic spoke of the symbolic wheel of the actual. The change of phenomena is merely the expansion and contraction of a cycle much in the same manner that a seed results in a tree and a tree results in a seed.
The occurence of nothing is the unmovable ever present potentiality which allows the transformative change of things to occur in the respect that the negation of a boundary through the act of change is an act of completion in achieving perfect unity, as perfect nothingness, while the appearance of a boundary is the paradoxical absence of absence, a pure nothingness where there is not even nothing as nothing is but a contrast to opposing being thus paradoxical on its own terms. Nothingness thus becomes the everpresent absolute by nature of being underlying potentiality which allows actualization to occur thus leaving an absolute unmoving cause as potentiality itself that is non linear by nature of an inherent universal groundlessness everpresent to all things actualizing. Potentiality is an absence of actuality thus is not a thing thus resulting in it effectively being an unchanging absolute nothing, an unmoved mover by virtue of spontaneous occurence of the actual and is subsequent occurence of its dissolution.
Occurence as nothing, or potentiality as the absence of actuality, takes on the role of pure negation thus negating said negation into a positive while dually it is a positive of positives leaving a negation of some degree of one positive relative to a greater or lesser one. In simpler terms to negate negation results in a positive and the positive of a positive leaves the negation of another positive. The paradox of occurence results in meta paradoxes and vice versa.
The transformative nature of occurence, as distinction alternating in and out of appearing, or rather giving impression upon that which is impressionable, requires an inherent cyclical nature grounded in the “phasing in and out phenomena” thus leaving the foundational form of occurence being, in symbolic terms, a sphere without circumferance with infinite centerpoints as each occurence through occurence is a cycle through a cycle, while dually the occurence being linearistic progression in all potential manners in a non-linear branching as the process of “phasing in” and “phasing out” progresses under the simple nature of the differences between eachother respectively as each effectively supersede eachother within a given context or in simpler terms “phasing in” and “phasing out” as meta-processes both progress towards eachother.
A deeper awareness of occurence results in it being, in symbolic terminology if not literal in some respects, akin to a corner less square where infinite squares within and without eachother observes only squares effectively being nothing. Occurence is it’s own foundationless foundation justified purely through “just being” or it’s “just is-ness” where potentiality as an unmoved mover exerts continual expansion and contraction of distinctions from and into nothingness as that which is complete is that which ceases to be given no change can further occur.
The foundational aspect of occurence results in a simple and subtle paradigm of interpreting reality where in depth truth, within the context of philosophy, is less about pursuit of truth and more of an awareness of the obvious where a phenomenon is taken for what it is: a transient appearance justified by virtue of occuring with justification being reduced to a mere occurence, a paradoxical appearance evidence by contrast that allows for said distinction of it.
Absolute truth under this terms is fundamentally the form and function of paradox, given connection and seperation as the fundamental unchanging distinction of nothingness given on their own terms when observed purely, where relativistic truth is the necessary contrast to the absolute that gives it a metaphorical ‘building’ in which to exist by allowing one ratio of change to provide the context for another in a perpetually expanding and contracting cycle. Absolute nature is within a given context through perpetual context, relativistic nature is merely partially observed absolutes where different angles imply a change which is non-existent.
However if one is to claim the notion of pure paradox to reality then no paradox occurs as paradox takes on a rational and sensical notion of being and yet paradox must just be for any sense to occur from this observation. In simpler terms, if all is paradoxical then there is no paradox as this conceptualization eliminates absurdity in place of the sensicality of the concept but this sensicality must admit to absurdity if absurdity is to be observed.
In simpler terms “things just are” and investigation into this nature “just is”.
Reality is merely the occurence of distinctions, by distinction relative forms exist and by relationship change where one change relative to another change results in what is static being merely a slower rate of change. By the occurence of distinctions the distinction of occurence occurs and thus distinction points to an inherent cyclical nature as the process of experience.