So if you’re stuck in dyadic binary thinking, but I’m talking in triadic trinary thinking, we’re going to be talking past each other. I don’t think it’s possible to have a meaningful discussion when we’re talking two different languages.
Triadic being is a unifier. When you’re thinking in dyads/binaries/dualisms, but you’re actually a process monist, you are thinking that illusory distinctions disappear into oblivion that has no distinctions (chaos). Isn’t that a funny thing to think when all the evidence from physics points to an original state of low entropy (not chaos)… and the unfolding since the “beginning” is according to rules? But anyway, our knowledge of the physics is not complete, so set that aside.
You can’t have process without substance undergoing (subsuming) process (distinct action that is not in isolation because triadic) and a plan/telos/program according to which the process undergoes (is enacted) in substance.
Previously on ILP:
@Ecmandu where the frick are you?