Maybe this has something to do with God, but I'm staying in this 1800s inn right now, and I just got this weird haunted feeling (known as the "heebie jeebies"). I looked up the inn online, and it turns out the inn is a known haunted inn and, get this, my room is the one known to be haunted!

However, don't be fooled by the word "simple" for it's only so by virtue of the wisdom gained from the collective effort of people actually philosophizing over many generations — TheMadFool

Does that mean that those people became simpletons? I'm confused. :chin:

So far I've heard of only theories in which everything has always existed/exists or nothing exists/existed. These are two opposite extremes of thinking and through my philosophy it is always a unification of the two that gives us truth. This is the principle of what I call a union of opposites, and is prevalent in our universe today. These two extremes could be called many things but in this case I will call them excess/deficient, I know Aristotle used them a lot to explain the balance of emotions, feelings, and habits which I consider all energy of some sort. For example; love is an energy because you can have an excess of it (pampering) or a deficient (neglect), each of which leads us out of the unified nature of the universe, and therefore out of life itself.

That said, everything that has an excess and a deficient can be considered energy. Because the universe we now know is an interplay of these opposites and no real extremes of these opposites exist(due to the presence of it's other), what came before the universe as we know it still had energy due to the law of conversation of energy, and it still had the principle of the union of opposites because energy existed. The picture I portray is an an empty yet infinite universe in which all of the various energies could only create through extremes and a union of opposites did not existed. Whatever the energy "God" was then (I have many reasons to believe it is thought) was the one that had unified these opposite extremes to create the universe.

The way "God unified these opposites remains a mystery, for if known I believe with the power of our thought we would be able to know and likewise become gods ourselves. Nonetheless, these opposites have an interplay between them like the inhalation and exhalation of the breath, or how our two feet walk( one always out competing the other) and this interplay allows events to unfold. For if these opposites were completely balanced then they would neutralize each other, which would stagnate all universal events. These opposites are henceforth not indifferent (for if they were it would be like they did not exist).

From my meditations when I walk my dog carrying a stick I realized that the most important thing to find the balance in my stick (and likewise in myself) is be using my feelings. This is where I think comes the advantage of being in a physical body, to be able to feel imbalances in your life for the body and mind are intrinsically connected (perhaps another union of opposites?). Being a massage therapist I know that whenever there is imbalances in the body the body dies, be it postural, functional, emotional, or habitual. And so I conclude that whenever we are out of touch with an interplay of these opposites and choose to use extremes in any aspect of our lives, we are, in truth, alienating ourselves from the essential nature of how the universe functions and so we suffer for it.

Does that mean that those people became simpletons? I'm confused. — jgill

I wasn't clear enough. My bad. The simplicity (of the task) of mental hygiene lies in its obviousness once one engages in philosophy and someone kind enough informs you of it (@180 Proof) but the actual processes involved ain't so easy. Thus don't be fooled by the word "simplicity". As they say and is the case this might just be an instance of hindsight being 20/20.

@180 Proof I wanted to cite you on mental hygiene but I thought you wouldn't care if I did or didn't. :up:

In my creation story, BEING is simply No-thing, except infinite Potential. Hence, nothing is Actual — Gnomon

I want to explore this idea of nothing as infinite potential a little more. Infinite potential can be taken to exert a "existential pressure" of equivalent magnitude and by "existential pressure" I mean that which makes the possible/potential actual/real. So, nothing as infinite potential exerts infinite "existential pressure" and something, perforce, comes into being - the real/actual pop out of this field of infinitie potential/possibility. Nothing then can't exist for the infinite potential in it exerts an infinite "existential pressure" that makes things (something) come into existence. There, you have your creation story based on nothing as infinite potential. No god though unless, of course, you call the infinite, in infinite potential, god. Nothing as infinite potential as infinite possibilities is reminiscent of omnipotence?

my room is the one known to be haunted! — Hanover

:scream:

through my philosophy it is always a unification of the two that gives us truth — Thinking

Golden mean fallacy! However I'm all excited about where you're going with this.

Whatever the energy "God" was then (I have many reasons to believe it is thought) was the one that had unified these opposite extremes to create the universe. — Thinking

Zoroastrianism? Angra Mainyu (destructive) vs Spenta Mainyu (creative)

Taoism? Yin (female) vs Yang (male)

However, according to @apokrisis or @m-theoryrules the universe is a broken symmetry i.e. there's an imbalance, one of the two opposing forces has the upperhand.

Yet, there's also the fact that the total energy in the universe is ZERO suggesting a perfect balance between yin and yang.

However, according to apokrisis or @m-theoryrules the universe is a broken symmetry i.e. there's an imbalance, one of the two opposing forces has the upperhand.

Yet, there's also the fact that the total energy in the universe is ZERO suggesting a perfect balance between yin and yang. — TheMadFool

Exactly my point: it is not a complete balance otherwise there would be a neutrality of the two and nothing would happen and the life wouldn't exist, but it is a unified interplay of the two forces seeming to always try to outcompete the other like your two feet walking. The reason I refrain from yin and yang is because there is a few inaccurate preconceived notions of what those mean for many. So in a sense the forces are balanced but in a dynamic way that allows movement and events to unfold (you need proper balance if you want to walk anywhere).

I suppose the Dao under my definition would be this unity of opposites which create the universe and in turn, ourselves.

The reason I refrain from yin and yang is because there is a few inaccurate preconceived notions of what those mean for many — Thinking

What are they?

The main thing is that yin and yang denote polarity mainly. The Yin Yang I create is the one of excess and deficit, being and nothingness, mind and anti-mind, rationality and anti-rationality.

The main thing is that yin and yang denote polarity mainly. The Yin Yang I create is the one of excess and deficit, being and nothingness, mind and anti-mind, rationality and anti-rationality. — Thinking

What do you mean by "polarity"? Yin and yang are basically opposites and covers your "...excess and deficit, being and nothingness, mind and anti-mind, rationality and anti-rationality"? These are, to my knowledge, polarities too.

polarity as in north and south, male and female, left and right, attraction and repulsion, hot and cold. Although now that I am thinking about it, polarity itself is subject to these opposite principles, such as more masculinity means less of femininity and visa versa or more hot means less cold. polarity could be described as a further division from the principle of being and nothingness, more so in being. which could be described as positive and negative states in energy rather then the existence or nonexistence of that energy. Just a slight diversion this yin and yang are, and so I like to say union of opposites to give a much broader picture that contains a deeper foundation.

I want to explore this idea of nothing as infinite potential a little more. Infinite potential can be taken to exert a "existential pressure" of equivalent magnitude and by "existential pressure" I mean that which makes the possible/potential actual/real. So, nothing as infinite potential exerts infinite "existential pressure" and something, perforce, comes into being - the real/actual pop out of this field of infinitie potential/possibility. Nothing then can't exist for the infinite potential in it exerts an infinite "existential pressure" that makes things (something) come into existence. There, you have your creation story based on nothing as infinite potential. No god though unless, of course, you call the infinite, in infinite potential, god. Nothing as infinite potential as infinite possibilities is reminiscent of omnipotence? — TheMadFool

I'm not sure I understand what you mean by "existential pressure". Your implication seems to be that "infinite existential potential" works like a balloon that inevitably goes "pop" when punctured. But the question arises, who or what does the puncturing? In a physical system, the internal pressure obeys the Pressure Law as defined by Boyle, but -- post pop -- the final arrangement of gas molecules is always random & disorganized. That eventual disorder may also apply to a Quantum Fluctuation in an amorphous mathematical field.

My notion of Infinite Potential, though, is a meta-physical concept, in that no physical things (such as gases) exist a priori. Instead, it's the transformation of inert Potential (think Plato's Forms) into Actuality, that creates the real things we call "gases". The potential exists timelessly & spacelessly as the idea or design of a possible thing. But the transformation (or EnFormAction) from Ideal to Real requires a causal act, in the form of an intention or decision. For example, in billiards, the 8 ball in a rack has the statistical potential to end-up in any pocket. But, until the shooter aims & acts intentionally, there is no ball in any pocket. The Potential is converted to Probability only after the stack is broken by the cue ball, imparting direction (laws) and momentum (energy) to each ball. That kind of "creation" results in teleological order : an organized goal-directed System.

In that metaphorical analogy, the "existential pressure" of the shooter is his mental Intention or teleological aim, which is the Final Cause of the Creative Act, The future pattern of actual balls in real pockets is a result of the Action of moving the cue-stick guided by Aim So, I don't think the improbable existence of our universe was an accidental release of "existential pressure". Instead, some kind of Intention (plan), by some kind of Mind, was necessary --- not to pop the balloon into random motion, but to Activate the Big Bang into the teleological process, we call Evolution. Randomness merely causes variations on a theme (Ideal Form), from which the "Program" naturally Selects the varieties (real forms) that meet certain criteria of fitness.

Since I know nothing about the hypothetical shooter -- who popped the Big Bang from a static stack of Potential, into a dynamic Organic system -- I don't claim to know the Mind of God. But, since, evolution shows signs of intention (teleology), I call that mysterious World Creator -- not the infinite Potential but the Actualizer -- by the suggestive but ambiguous name "G*D". :cool:


Platonic Forms : The Platonic Forms, according to Plato, are just ideas of things that actually exist. They represent what each individual thing is supposed to be like in order for it to be that specific thing. For example, the Form of human shows qualities one must have in order to be human. It is a depiction of the idea of humanness.
https://owlcation.com/humanities/An-Introduction-to-Platos-Theory-of-Forms

Law of Meta-physics :
Since the mechanical laws of physics don’t explain the emergence of metaphysical Life & Mind & Qualia, we must assume that the program for our evolving world includes algorithms for the immaterial aspects of reality. Exactly what those “laws” might be, remain to be discovered. But, like the regularities of physics they are probably mathematical and proportional in nature.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page14.html

Aristotelian Final Cause : End or Purpose: a final cause is that for the sake of which a thing is changing. The design intent or goal.

Infinite Potential : In ancient Greek creation myths Chaos was the void state preceding the creation of the universe or cosmos. It literally means "emptiness", but can also refer to a random undefined unformed state that was changed into the orderly law-defined enformed Cosmos. In modern Cosmology, Chaos can represent the eternal/infinite state from which the Big Bang created space/time. In that sense of infinite Potential, it is an attribute of G*D, whose power of EnFormAction converts possibilities (Platonic Forms) into actualities (physical things).
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page12.html
Note -- "Infinite Potential" is another term for Omnipotence.

We don't see eye to eye regarding your concept of infinite potential as pertains to nothing. For me, the infinite potential of nothing would, of its own accord, bring something into existence. There would be no need for "...some kind of Mind" to actualize the potential. What's the point of having infinite potential if it needs something else to get things moving? In fact the infinity in infinite potential is reminiscent of the divine and I expected you to grab that opportunity to introduce god into your theory. It turns out, I was wrong. :sad:

I still don't get it. What do you mean by opposites if not in a yin-yang sense?

↪Gnomon
We don't see eye to eye regarding your concept of infinite potential as pertains to nothing. For me, the infinite potential of nothing would, of its own accord, bring something into existence. There would be no need for "...some kind of Mind" to actualize the potential. What's the point of having infinite potential if it needs something else to get things moving? In fact the infinity in infinite potential is reminiscent of the divine and I expected you to grab that opportunity to introduce god into your theory. It turns out, I was wrong. — TheMadFool

Sorry to disappoint you. I only refer to Infinite Potential as "no-thing" to indicate that -- as Pure Potential -- it contains nothing Actual --- just as a blueprint is not a physical building, but merely a teleological description of a future structure. However, part of the Ultimate Potential of the whole design-build system is to execute the design, resulting in a real brick & mortar house.

Unfortunately, calling something "Nothing" sounds paradoxical. So, I prefer to use the ancient notion of "Chaos" as an analogy of unlimited Potential. This is not an indication of "chaos" in the conventional sense as "complete disorder and confusion", but of un-formed randomness as raw fodder for en-formation. Hence, I think of Chaos in the Platonic sense of "a pre-existent chaos to generate the ordered universe" Plato typically avoided using the term "god" to label his workmanlike creator (demiurge). Yet, he implied that the Workman was merely carrying out the plans of The Architect. In my myth, they are one and the same. But, If you prefer the workman analogy, I also call it "EnFormAction", which is my term for directed Energy.

Unlike Plato, I see no need for "something else" to cause random Chaos to become orderly Cosmos. Infinite Potential (omnipotence) iherently includes the power to actuate. Another term I use instead of Chaos is "BEING" : the unlimited power to be, and to become. However, although I see evidence of Teleology and Intention in the evolving world, to avoid biblical inferences, I have been forced to likewise remain ambiguous about the nature of my hypothetical deity, which I sometimes label "G*D". Is that close enough for you? :cool:


Chaos :
In ancient Greek creation myths Chaos was the void state preceding the creation of the universe or cosmos. It literally means "emptiness", but can also refer to a random undefined unformed state that was changed into the orderly law-defined enformed Cosmos. In modern Cosmology, Chaos can represent the eternal/infinite state from which the Big Bang created space/time. In that sense of infinite Potential, it is an attribute of G*D, whose power of EnFormAction converts possibilities (Platonic Forms) into actualities (physical things).
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page12.html

Platonic Chaos : In the Timaeus Plato presents an elaborately wrought account of the formation of the universe and an explanation of its impressive order and beauty. The universe, he proposes, is the product of rational, purposive, and beneficent agency. It is the handiwork of a divine Craftsman (“Demiurge,” dêmiourgos, 28a6) who, imitating an unchanging and eternal model, imposes mathematical order on a preexistent chaos to generate the ordered universe (kosmos). The governing explanatory principle of the account is teleological: the universe as a whole as well as its various parts are so arranged as to produce a vast array of good effects. For Plato this arrangement is not fortuitous, but the outcome of the deliberate intent of Intellect (nous), anthropomorphically represented by the figure of the Craftsman who plans and constructs a world that is as excellent as its nature permits it to be.
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/plato-timaeus/

polarity would be black and white.
my definition for yin yang would be the absence of black with an excess of white and same way visa versa. Similar but different. One denotes merely only the extremes in energy while mine explains the interplay of the energies going on in the universe.

It is not a complete balance for if it was you would only get a grey, stagnant, middle zone which would put a stop to the pendulum (universe) swinging. Likewise, true extremes can only exist outside of the natural order of things and is out of touch with how the universe works. Because extremes are absent from how life works they are falsehoods. So, since the principle of the unity of opposites is essential to the functioning of the universe as a whole, it contains truthfulness. This is what I consider the Tao.

I identify an energy as that it has an excess and a deficient. Energy is always in constant motion and is always trying to balance/compete with the other(like your two feet walking), but the question is: Who set the pendulum in motion? What is it that could unify these extremes in all the energies of the universe to create one that is alive and full of dances? A universe in which it is most certainly abound with creative potential? I feel like one of those questions should be unanswered and the other self-evident. What is your take?

I identify an energy as that it has an excess and a deficient. Energy is always in constant motion and is always trying to balance/compete with the other(like your two feet walking), but the question is: Who set the pendulum in motion? What is it that could unify these extremes in all the energies of the universe to create one that is alive and full of dances? A universe in which it is most certainly abound with creative potential? I feel like one of those questions should be unanswered and the other self-evident. What is your take?↪Gnomon — Thinking

Energy is a general name for Change. And change occurs when a whole is divided into parts, that are then attracted to each other as positive & negative charges. Negative Change (Entropy) is destructive, while positive Change (En-formation) is constructive. In a polarized state, positive & negative are separated, with no in-between. That results in maximum attraction, as in the poles of a magnet. But most things are not completely polarized, so there is a continuum, which gradually shades from positive to negative. Energy "flows" from the hot (excess) pole to the cold (deficit) pole, so that eventually the system becomes balanced as "warm" (unified, complete). For example, a battery has positive & negative poles, but its energy is only Potential or Virtual, until the circuit is completed.

In my Enformationism thesis, everything in the world, both physical & metaphysical, is a form of Generic Information. And, as Shannon discovered, Information boils down to 1s & 0s : the ratio (percentage) between Everything and Nothing. Once you grasp the significance of that simple notion, the attractive force between Polarity & Continuity, you have the basis for a Theory of Everything.

"Creative Potential" is what I call Enformy as the opposite of Entropy, and EnFormAction as the creative power to give form to the formless. As to Who or What "set the pendulum -- of construction (Enformy) and destruction (Entropy" -- in motion", Aristotle called it the "Prime Mover" or "First Cause". But a more common term is "Creator" or "God". For theists, the Creator is self-existent, hence eternal. But for atheists, the ongoing Causation is due to self-existent Energy + Laws. However, "a rose by another name would smell as sweet". So, I compromise, and sometimes call the pendulum pusher by the ambiguous label "G*D". That Prime Mover is a combination of Power (energy) and Intention (laws). :smile:

Energy :
Scientists define “energy” as the ability to do work, but don't know what energy consists of. They assume as an unproven axiom that it's an eternal causal force that existed prior to the Big Bang, along with mathematical laws. Energy is a positive or negative relationship between things, and physical Laws are limitations on the push & pull of those forces. So, all they know is what Energy does, which is to transform material objects in various ways. Energy itself is amorphous & immaterial. So if you reduce energy to its essence of information, it seems more akin to mind than matter. Likewise, all we know of G*D is what it does : create. That's why I think of Energy as the “power” aspect of the willpower of G*D, which is guided by the intentional (lawlike) “will” aspect. Together I call them :EnFormAction.

Generic Information :
Information is Generic in the sense of generating all forms from a formless pool of possibility -- the Platonic "Forms".
http://bothandblog2.enformationism.info/page29.html

Both/And Principle :
My coinage for the holistic principle of Complementarity, as illustrated in the Yin/Yang symbol. Opposing or contrasting concepts are always part of a greater whole. Conflicts between parts can be reconciled or harmonized by putting them into the context of a whole system.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

Creative Potential :
Enformy, in the sense of positive change; counter-balanced with Entropy as negative change. The +/- values are relative to the original design intent.
Note : Energy is merely Change that can go both ways.
http://bothandblog2.enformationism.info/page76.html

What is EnFormAction? : http://bothandblog2.enformationism.info/page29.html

And, as Shannon discovered, Information boils down to 1s & 0s : the ratio (percentage) between Everything and Nothing. — Gnomon

Taking it a step higher all matter can be boiled down to information or energy. Then, perhaps information and energy are synonymous. Okay, then it goes that the universe is comprised of these opposites(1s and 0s). With this principle in mind (no pun intended)what came before the universe of 1s AND 0s is the universe of 1s OR 0s, or you could say the existence before this one was filled with extremes and only extremes of energy(1s OR 0s).

As is known, all logic can be built off of And and Not gates, and not with only OR gates. Hence why our universe has rationality and before the universe there was only spontaneous and extreme states of anti-rational energy(sound familiar?). However, OR gates exist conceptually which leads me to believe that thought was the prime factor in organizing a chaotic, anti-rational world by unifying the extremes of energy states.

This is if we are going off of the fact that our universe has rationality, and when there is rationality there is anti-rationality in our universe of a union of opposites. This is where I am stumped, deadlocked, as to how the universe unified and created multiple dimensions of opposites(hopefully 3). Was it rationality, thought, mind, all of the above, nothing, somebody tell me(or actually don't) what was it that unified these opposites since I think the something that unified the opposites wouldn't be subject to the opposites themselves which means it couldn't be energy, maybe it was the opposites themselves...Gah!

I would certainly like God to have an intelligence so it fit neatly into many concepts, but to how far could this intelligence fathom? Mayhaps unfathomable with our limited intellect. Anywho, what do you think on the rationality and anti-rationality duality of the universe in aiding it's creation?

There's a story of how Raven released the People from a cockle shell, stole the light, and brought it out to light up the world (the trickster?); another story of the beginning of our frailty, tied to our knowledge of the world; another story of a cave with a light that creates a new world, if only we could turn from our shadow.

These are origin stories. Theology? The genesis of everything? or (and?) Philosophy? (conducted through literature?** ) our (re-)birth, our birth to ourselves, the beginning of a journey, where everything is clearer, say, seen in a different light?

**Other stories: Hobbes' state of nature; Rousseau's first land fenced from that nature; Hume's creation story of creation stories (causality)...

Taking it a step higher all matter can be boiled down to information or energy. Then, perhaps information and energy are synonymous. Okay, then it goes that the universe is comprised of these opposites(1s and 0s). With this principle in mind (no pun intended) what came before the universe of 1s AND 0s is the universe of 1s OR 0s, or you could say the existence before this one was filled with extremes and only extremes of energy(1s OR 0s). — Thinking

Yes, our space-time universe is indeed a dynamic system of oppositions, with a historical pattern similar to Hegel's zig-zag Dialectic. The Multiverse Theory assumes that our world is just one of an infinite series of dynamic worlds, with no point of origin. But that's not how I imagine the static eternal state from which our time-bound world emerged.

Of course, I don't know any of this from personal experience. But, in my Enformationism worldview, I picture the Source of our Reality in the metaphor of Plato's Chaos : infinite Potential, nothing Actual. So, since our finite world is a dynamic competition of oppositions (Life vs Death), I conclude that anything infinite/eternal must be balanced & harmonious, or it would eventually tear itself apart. So, the Source was not "filled with extremes of energy" but with the inert Potential for patterns, forms, and oppositions. That un-actualized Potential is Hofstadter's "eerie type of order" . You could call it "occult order", but I don't like the spooky implications of that term. So I simply call it "The Unknown G*D".

Randomness is defined as the quality or state of lacking a pattern or principle of organization. In that case, you can't tell the 1s from the 0s, so to speak, because they are all mixed-up, like gas molecules. However, mathematical Randomness is also full of Potential for an infinite variety of forms, once some input force has knocked it off-balance. From that point onward, it displays patterns where groups of elements are clustered into recognizable forms.

What we call "Energy" in the real world is the flow of Changes due to the imbalance of 1s & 0s, of Hot & Cold, of excess & deficit. Yet, in "the existence before this one" there was no dynamic Energy, but only a Static, Virtual, Potential & Pent-up Organizing Force --- Nothing happens until an intentional Act releases the Force. And that "pop" is the origin of our crazy mixed-up world. :smile:

Chaos : the formless immaterial substance supposed to have existed before the creation of the enformed universe.

"It turns out that an eerie type of chaos can lurk just behind a facade of order - and yet, deep inside the chaos lurks an even eerier type of order"
-- Douglas Hofstadter

PATTERNLESS RANDOMNESS

PATTERN WITHIN RANDOMNESS

I would certainly like God to have an intelligence so it fit neatly into many concepts, but to how far could this intelligence fathom? Mayhaps unfathomable with our limited intellect. Anywho, what do you think on the rationality and anti-rationalityduality of the universe in aiding it's creation? — Thinking

Since I have no personal revelation from G*D, all I can say is that the Creator of this world necessarily had the Potential for Life, Intelligence, and Rationality, among other features of the creation. But one characteristic that my Holistic G*D could not have is Duality. That imperfection may be an intentional "flaw" in the Creation. :cool:

:fire: :clap:

polarity would be black and white.
my definition for yin yang would be the absence of black with an excess of white and same way visa versa. Similar but different. One denotes merely only the extremes in energy while mine explains the interplay of the energies going on in the universe.

It is not a complete balance for if it was you would only get a grey, stagnant, middle zone which would put a stop to the pendulum (universe) swinging. Likewise, true extremes can only exist outside of the natural order of things and is out of touch with how the universe works. Because extremes are absent from how life works they are falsehoods. So, since the principle of the unity of opposites is essential to the functioning of the universe as a whole, it contains truthfulness. This is what I consider the Tao.

I identify an energy as that it has an excess and a deficient. Energy is always in constant motion and is always trying to balance/compete with the other(like your two feet walking), but the question is: Who set the pendulum in motion? What is it that could unify these extremes in all the energies of the universe to create one that is alive and full of dances? A universe in which it is most certainly abound with creative potential? I feel like one of those questions should be unanswered and the other self-evident. What is your take? — Thinking

Well, you still haven't told me what the difference between yin-yang and your notion of the interplay of opposites is.

Infinite Potential (omnipotence) iherently includes the power to actuate — Gnomon

My thoughts exactly!

Gnomon
:fire: :clap: — 180 Proof

Where's the fire? Here's an extinguisher. :cry: :lol: :rofl:

You're extinguisher is well deserved. We seem to be on the same page for most of these concepts and I was able to extrapolate additional information from you to back up my theory, so, thank you. I do also think that although this universe is chaotic and full of unrealized potentials moment by moment, it nonetheless has laws and principles that make it somewhat understandable. This is why quantum physics has credibility and usefulness.

I did, but I can put it more straight-forward. Yin-Yang are extremes(like absolute black and white). While the union of opposites utilize both of these extremes to create a dynamic, middle zone. Close to the same but different.

If the extremes would be birth and death, then the union of opposites would be the preservation of life in the middle, and our whole universe is founded on this principle. That is if we live in an eternal, limitless universe(and modern physics is just starting to heavily back this theory). And as long as we have the other extreme in our universe, I think true extremes are impossible and foolish, hence the falsity in thinking likewise.

I did, but I can put it more straight-forward. Yin-Yang are extremes(like absolute black and white). While the union of opposites utilize both of these extremes to create a dynamic, middle zone. Close to the same but different. — Thinking

So, yin-yang = opposites. What exactly do you mean by opposites?

So, yin-yang = opposites. What exactly do you mean by opposites? — TheMadFool

Sorry for butting-in. But . . . :naughty:

Yin Yang : Taoism is China's indigenous religion. It's also a religion of unity and opposites, as evident in its best-known symbol, the circle of yin and yang. This represents two primal opposite forces in the universe: light and dark, male and female, hot and cold.
https://news.cgtn.com/news/3d3d674d7a45444f34457a6333566d54/index.html

Complementary Opposites : This article is an attempt to incorporate Taoist wisdom into contemporary process theory, and clinical and social philosophy. It highlights the coexistence of opposites (harmony and conflict, creation and decay, union and separation) in varying proportions, and the priority of differentiation over synthesis, and of creation over decay. Opposites are complementary, and complementaries are opposite, both synergic and antagonistic. Opposites coexist (dialectics) but separated (logic). Interacting opposites co‐create novelty, complexity and diversity. Life and culture emerge from the intercourse of opposites. Creation requires and fosters diversity.
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1002/%28SICI%291099-1743%281998090%2915%3A5%3C429%3A%3AAID-SRES270%3E3.0.CO%3B2-T

Both/And Principle :
My coinage for the holistic principle of Complementarity, as illustrated in the Yin/Yang symbol. Opposing or contrasting concepts are always part of a greater whole. Conflicts between parts can be reconciled or harmonized by putting them into the context of a whole system.
* The Enformationism worldview entails the principles of Complement-arity, Reciprocity & Holism, which are necessary to offset the negative effects of Fragmentation, Isolation & Reductionism. Analysis into parts is necessary for knowledge of the mechanics of the world, but synthesis of those parts into a whole system is required for the wisdom to integrate the self into the larger system. In a philosophical sense, all opposites in this world (e.g. space/time, good/evil) are ultimately reconciled in Enfernity (eternity & infinity).
* Conceptually, the BothAnd principle is similar to Einstein's theory of Relativity, in that what you see ─ what’s true for you ─ depends on your perspective, and your frame of reference; for example, subjective or objective, religious or scientific, reductive or holistic, pragmatic or romantic, conservative or liberal, earthbound or cosmic. Ultimate or absolute reality (ideality) doesn't change, but your conception of reality does. Opposing views are not right or wrong, but more or less accurate for a particular purpose.
* This principle is also similar to the concept of Superposition in sub-atomic physics. In this ambiguous state a particle has no fixed identity until “observed” by an outside system. For example, in a Quantum Computer, a Qubit has a value of all possible fractions between 1 & 0. Therefore, you could say that it is both 1 and 0.
http://blog-glossary.enformationism.info/page10.html

It's not the same if you study yin-yang further my definition is different, it is also slightly different from what you explained

I guess I maybe wasn't clear enough, but yin yang has polarity. My opposites would be excess polarity or lack of polarity. As I said, you could describe polarity as being a division of the principle of the union of opposites, since they polarity itself is an energy(electromagnetism) they are actually subject to an excess and a deficient. This is the more foundational opposites I speak of. This is also my slight differentiation of my opposites to the Yin-Yang principle