Sauwelios – The idea that value-ontology rests the idea of self-valuing erupting from nothingess is an error. It rests only on the observation that this is in fact that a self-valuing must exist, if there is any valuing going on at all.
Regarding origin, I have simply observed, facing the notion of no-thingness, is that this grants its possibility, by virtue of chaos’ incapacity of enforcing its impossibility.
I have let myself be foolishly drawn into discussing nothing, whereas I clearly posited chaos / no-thingness. i.e., theoretic potential for somethingness, as the limit. So discussing with you has not only been doing the job of clarifying for me, but also of misleading, when we began treating the notion of chaos (being different from flux, as I made logically clear), which stands at the limit of my theory, as nothing.
The idea that value-ontology is essentially the same as the will to power is wrong. The will to power treats the subjects capability to engage otherness as a given. This has been the main problem I have had with the theory. On which terms does it do so? Nietzsche has explained nothing in this respect. He simply observes that the subject of will to power has this ability.
Where N. treats this capacity as a given, I ask: how can anything value? The answer: by being/holding a standard-value. And how can it be a standard? I have posited as the answer: its full being must be engaged in positing itself as a standard. Its being can be nothing besides positing itself as a standard, as this is the only certainty we have of what it is.
This is the root on which the entire theory rests - that being a standard is the activity granting the possibility of the secondary modus of this activity of valuing otherness in order to dominate/incorporate/reject. What has been misunderstood/miscommunicated, and this happens at the same level as trying to implant a crude causality-temporality thinking to this theory, is that this positing itself as a stands happens logically prior to valuing otherness, but can only be physically observable when it values another thing, when it starts to accumulate, when it begins willing to power.
So here we are back again, thankfully, at the real theory.
The notion of nothing must be entirely dismissed as nonsensical, and the notion of chaos, which means flat time-space, as the ground/limit.