Quotessence
Home / Authors / Dejan Stojanovic
Dejan Stojanovic

Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

Poet

Filter quotes by topic

Famous Dejan Stojanovic Quotes

“If absolute perfection is an idle walk from one point to another, which is no walk at all, then there is no existence and no life. If we come from this postulate and premise, the existence and life, as we see it, must be, conditionally speaking, “less perfect.” This less-perfect world (existence) is possible only through creation or recreation (“design”). But this creation is not possible without recreation. There is nothing to start from except the Absolute itself—Being and Nonbeing (Something and Nothing). There is nothing to hope for outside this realm. Nothing can be created from nothing if the Being does not create it. Regardless of how omnipotent it is, the Being cannot create anything except out of itself. Even creation out of itself would not be the real creation but recreation because the created being would still be the same (although modified).”

“Now we come to the idea of ex nihilo. We do not know anything about the world before the Big Bang, which could mean that the world came from nothing. But if we ask religious people, nothing can be created out of nothing. But if nothing comes out of nothing, the creation must be the “Child” of existing something, which must be God. If even God cannot create something out of nothing, it must create the world (universe) out of itself. If this creation is the creation out of itself, then it cannot inherently be different from the so-called “creator.” If it cannot be inherently different from the creator, then this creation cannot be precisely called creation but recreation. But even this recreation is impossible without the Nothing. In this sense, there is a creation (partially) out of nothing (ex nihilo) because the real creating force is the Absolute and not only a God or a Universal Mind. The Universal Mind creates and procreates with the help of Nothingness and not solely from nothingness because ex nihilo nihil fit—from nothing, nothing comes to be.”

“The Absolute can exercise its potential only through non-accidental accidents or chances. Chance, although almost accidental, is not accidental. In a predetermined world, chances would not be possible. Even if chances existed, they would only be appearances of chances and not real chances. In a world (universe) established based on its full potential, chance is compatible with determinism. This almost absurd statement becomes logical if observed from the point of view of the potential of the Absolute, which is predetermined. Absolute is not only absolute but also capable of infinity by exercising its infinite potential.”

“Although the absolute potential of the Absolute and its existence are predetermined, any particular existence is developed, among other things, through chance. The voyage toward infinity allows free will and secures its compatibility with determinism based on the absolute potential of the Absolute itself. The absolute potential would not be possible without the magic force of chance. If a world were predetermined, that would be like playing out the story with the known outcome. In such a world, even if existence, or multiple creations, would go ad infinitum, the outcome of any possible existence (universe) would be predetermined and therefore known at the moment of creation. If this were possible, even theoretically, what would be the purpose of such existence (existences) if the outcome is already known? If the sole purpose were to exist, this possibility would not satisfy the ultimate purpose, which is the meaning itself.”

“The only real purpose and the only real meaning lies in freedom, and there is no real freedom without free will. Free will can only exist if there is an element of chance. But this chance is not a chance as we ordinarily view it, but a chance for possibility and existence, a chance of existence itself. In this manner, the fundamental forces of the world are manifested in the world, regardless of the level of awareness of this knowledge. Knowledge of the world is intrinsic to the world, irrespective of its level or degree of awareness. On the other hand, Chance is the real potential of the world.”

“Only emptiness and nothingness can provide space to the world; chance is the uniting force of the Being and the Nonbeing. If we view evolution in this context, evolution, as selection, is no longer a random selection or Herbert Spencer’s “survival of the fittest” but the survival of existence itself. Whatever survives is thanks not only through combinations and recombination of some otherwise self-organized dead matter, self-powered peculiarly through an infinite series of accidents, but rather through an infinite series of predetermined chances. Determinism is based more on chance than on determination. A determined chance is not a chance, strictly speaking. This chance is not chaotic and random. The chance is more orderly than a lack of chance. The chance gives rise to a more deterministic world regarding purpose, meaning, and destiny. Destiny is the purpose of determination. But destiny, as all else discussed, is not necessarily determined. What is determined is that there should be existence, purpose, and meaning. From the point of view of purpose and meaning, the best possible existence is the existence responsible for its own becoming through chance.”

“If chance is less accidental than we think and the world is less self-governed, the outcome is also the same for believers and non-believers. All arguments and counterarguments become worthless because of existence's vastness and paradoxical nature or the universe itself. Under such a scenario, all views or counterarguments would fit equally on either side.”

“What is natural selection? Do organisms develop due to an environment, or does the environment only trigger the potential to evolve in almost endless ways? What determines the survival of the fittest? How are the fittest organisms or animals formed? How can the first fittest animal be formed, and based on what? How can anybody, or anything, become stronger or better than anybody else or anything else, from the same material, under the same conditions? (Is fitness already there?)”

“Agnosticism is compatible with faith. We either believe or not, irrespective of our ability to find the truth. Faith, developed or established based on the nominal religion, is not proof of our ability to prove God’s existence and is not proof of our implied agnosticism. Genuine faith is based on the belief in God regardless of the lack of evidence, religion, or agnosticism that may exist in a believer.”

“A believer is not necessarily someone who never had any doubts about the existence of God but rather someone who did not submit to skepticism and doubt. A believer is the one who fights agnosticism; an agnostic is the one who submits to it. To put it differently—a believer is the one whose atheism (or agnosticism) submits to his or her faith (or belief); an atheist is the one whose faith (if there is any) submits to atheism rather than submitting to faith or agnosticism; an agnostic is the one in whom faith and disbelief are equally present. This equidistance to God and atheism makes agnostics appear somewhat indifferent about these questions. Agnostics would rather wait for proof than bother tirelessly with the question without evidence. In believers, faith wins; in atheists, disbelief wins; in agnostics, neither belief nor disbelief wins.”

“COSMOLOGICAL ARGUMENT The First Cause Argument The real problem with the first cause argument is not if God or anything else needed a cause but if the first cause is necessary for anything. If the Ultimate Being, or Absolute, always existed, nothing else exists or can exist outside of it except a transformation, “creation,” or recreation within the Absolute. Absolute Being is not the first cause of the world. We must agree with Russel that the world is without a cause. The view that the Absolute (in someone’s eyes, God) is without a cause does not mean that the world had a different, specific cause. The world is the Absolute itself or emanation of it. The world is the life of the Absolute (or God, but not a God from religious books), not something “different” from the Absolute. Therefore, neither the Absolute, God, Nothingness, nor the Universe need a cause because they are all the Absolute itself. Absolute is the causeless cause operating within itself. The world is a manifestation of the Absolute and its celebration, lovemaking between the Being and Nonbeing in the form of the cosmic fireworks for the hidden eyes of the Absolute. The World is a causeless cause's transformation, creation, or Recreation. The Nothingness and the Being or Something are eternal and, therefore, are without a cause. The real question for atheists is how something can appear out of nothing at some point. Believing that something can come out from nothing is way less believable than the idea that there is an eternal Being that does not need a cause. We may call it whatever name we choose, but it is not necessarily incompatible with science. The limitations of science and its limited outreach cannot serve as proof against the eternal source of everything. Limitations are only proof of the level of science at some point. There is no absolute knowledge, and we can say, with almost absolute certainty, that humans cannot acquire absolute knowledge. Even if this were possible, humans would no longer be humans but be something else.”

“The Argument from Design Based on Russell's treatment of this argument, we assume that Russel expected that the world's creation, by design, had to be perfect. But, as with all other arguments, we must establish what design and perfection mean. If we do not clearly define what design is and what perfection is, we are applying our judgments to something either undefined or loosely defined. Evolutionary theory, be it Darwin’s theory, cannot be proof of a bad design of the world. Anomalies or shortages in the world are not proof of a bad design. Imperfections are needed in the world and serve a higher purpose. Let’s say that God if he existed, wanted to create the perfect world. This perfect world would be sterile. In the perfect world, there would be no cosmic hierarchies, lows, and highs, enough friction to sustain life as something whose purpose is not to be made perfect from the beginning but to seek perfection, to make “progress” in myriad ways toward the main purpose which is life itself. Life, by definition, is not perfect. Perfect life is not a real life. The purpose of design is not to predict a Ku Klux Klan or the fascists and eliminate them from the design before any creation but to put the “engine” of the vast Universe in motion, to enable the world to seek its paths freely, without a God playing dice. That is where determinism and free will come together to create a sensible world. Design does not mean playing dice, nor necessarily creating something new, but the creator offers himself an exit to exist in an ever-new world, a new form with meaning. We also may say that in the Universe or Omniverse, beyond our knowledge, there can be not only thirty-six (to make a comparison with dice) but a googolplex of universes (dice), and the possibility for combinations is infinite. “Impossibility to prove God” is not proof that God does not exist. Russel would argue that the burden of proof is on the person making a claim, but the world itself is proof of God’s existence. The solution to this enigma is to recognize that the world is God. The problem is not belief or disbelief, first cause, natural law or good or bad design, or any other argument for the existence or against the existence of God; the problem is in our understanding and consensus about the idea of what God is. Argumentation or proof can never be shifted to only one side. Something so obvious as the world does not need proof but understanding that the world is also, in its deepest nature, God itself. We can fight as long as we want, but if we fight from different positions for the sake of different positions, we are not going anywhere. God is not the same for the theist or the deist. Christian God is so far from Spinoza’s idea about God. The majority of people who are atheists today are atheists more in revolt against nominal, official religions and not necessarily in revolt against God if this God was better defined or approached from an angle unaffected by religions.”

“At the speed of light, the mass unites every particle (Everything) in a unified “vibration.” At the speed of light, the “kinetic” force would be equivalent to the force of infinite mass. It is not that the mass becomes infinite, but the force of “mass,” “gravitational” pull, as a consequence of speed (motion), becomes as strong as if it were infinite. The source of gravitation is not mass but motion and speed (kinetic property of mass and matter). This “point” is the door between our world, as we experience it, and the primordial world. This “point” is the gateway between noumenon and appearance, between the noumenon and phenomenon.”

“At the point of “absolute speed,” the mass, energy, or anything we consider material disappears. Absolute speed is “speedless.” Absolute speed is always at the same point, which is the pointless point: speed without the speed, the point without the point—beginning, at the same time as the end. Absolute speed is motionless. Without motion or speed, there is no mass. Without motion, the mass disappears. Without motion, all laws of physics stop functioning.”

“Motion is the unifying force of Everything. Without motion, no other forces exist on the micro or macro level, quantum physics, or the Universe level. Motion is the force unifying the whole Universe in one Unified Field. This Unified Field is one organism, and we call it the Universe. Without motion, there is no unity. What powers the motion is the Universal Mind. The Universe is a Child of the Universal Mind. Although the Universe is a “program” of a Universal Mind, there is still freedom and free will based on the potential of the Absolute to always be different in its infinite manifestations.”

“When, at the speed of light, the mass becomes “infinite,” that is the moment of absolute, infinite density when space disappears. “Infinite” density is the “point” of disappearance. The spaceless point of zero is the channel between the Being and Nonbeing, between existence and nothingness. Through this zero point, the Universal Mind “materializes” itself by creating “matter” and the existing universe. That is the “point” before the Big Bang, the point of absolute density and no space or time. Absolute density is the “point” before the dispersion of Oneness (Singularity) into materialized plurality. Infinite mass is impossible. The state of absolute mass would be when everything would transform into mass, and the void would disappear. That is impossible. Reaching the state of infinite mass is the same state the “mass” or “energy” was in before the Big Bang. That state is the state of no mass and no energy. Absolute “density” is the state beyond matter and energy. This state is immaterial. The effect of the infinite kinetic energy would be equivalent to the infinite mass if possible.”

“Gravitational pull is the Max Plank’s vibration, which, as a source of motion, is the source of the gravitational pull, without which kinetic and potential energy would be zero. At this point, everything stops. At the speed of light, an object has infinite kinetic energy, which equals infinite mass. This infinite kinetic energy or infinite mass is static and massless. That is the point of absolute density. The world becomes static when its mass reaches the point of absolute speed, which would be equivalent to the same infinite point reached by the mass traveling at the speed of light. This is not infinite mass but an effect of the kinetic energy produced by the speed of light equal to the infinite mass. This proves my point that everything would stop if it were not for the kinetic energy and the “gravitational” pull fed by the immaterial Universal Source of everything.”

“The first and most important relationship is the Being and the Nonbeing relationship. This relationship enables the world to put itself into motion. Existence is the source of relativity and relations. Relations are the source of life. Relativity is the source of life of the Absolute Being and the Absolute Nonbeing. Once in a relationship, the Absolute Being becomes a Relative Being, and the Absolute Nonbeing becomes a Relative Nonbeing. The relativity of the poles of the Absolute creates the relativity of the Absolute. Without relativity, absolute would not be possible. Without an absolute, relativity would be meaningless and accidental.”

“The Creator, the Primordial Being (Universal Mind), is the Ultimate Primary Quality of Reality. Creation (energy, matter) is the secondary quality of reality. The effects of the secondary qualities on the mind are tertiary qualities on my scale of qualities. In Lock’s classification, our secondary quality would be primary, and our tertiary quality would be secondary. This distinction is essential for understanding the nature of reality.”

“Small particles succeed in uniting, and their ordering is not regulated by smaller or bigger masses because, in the primordial state, there are no bigger or smaller masses. The mover puts everything in motion or creates an illusion of movement. The mover produced enough vibration to cause the formation of quarks, electrons, and possibly “other particles” from the primordial foggy fluid and fire in trillions of degrees.”

“Kant insists on experience in terms of cognition and understanding, which further implies that pure thought accessing the noumenal world is, in a way, impossible since there is no experience to check it. We state not only that the whole world is an “illusion” but that the Noumenon, as the ultimate source, is the creator of the phenomenal world operating as a program of the Noumenal domain of the same world.”

“If the will materializes as an idea, this distinction becomes less distinct. Almost the same scenarios, as in metaphysics, can be applied here within the realm of the physical world. What serves the role of the noumenon in Plato’s sense (even Kantian) is replaced here not by a metaphysical (transcendental) idea but by an always-present “idea,” carried by will and manifested through the world (matter).”

“We cannot say that what we don’t understand about the universe or what we do not know about the universe does not exist. Our ignorance about the myriad of unknown and outstanding issues does not mean that these issues are teapots orbiting the sun or dragons or spirits hiding in our garages, apartments, or homes. There is only one home we all inhabit. That home is this universe, this world we live in. We learned much about our home but constantly pursued discoveries and new knowledge to bring us closer to the stars and the core of everything. That core of everything that we all crave hides beyond our cognitive abilities and shifts away again and again, regardless of our progress and discoveries. Are we closer to the truth today than Plato was almost 2,500 years ago?”

“Quantum entanglement is proof or a sign of the Universal Mind at work, simultaneously securing the oneness or singularity of the “material” world. That is the ultimate immaterial reality operating within the “material” reality. The laws of “physics” are at work with maximum speed, yet the information is ever-present and omnipresent simultaneously, which is proof of quantum entanglement.”

“Space is only possible in existence because beyond existence, in the pure essence of the Absolute, there is no space, which means there is no time. The other mode or sine qua non of existence is a plurality. The world must transform from primordial oneness and singularity into the plurality of existence or life. This transformation does not mean that the singularity disappears but that this singularity transforms into a plurality that powers not only existence and life but, more importantly, meaning and purpose. Still, there is always an underlying Oneness pervading reality of which quantum entanglement is one of the most obvious signs.”

“Quantum entanglement Quantum entanglement is a sign and subtle proof of the Universal Mind securing the oneness or singularity of the “material” world. This way, the ultimate immaterial reality operates within the “material” reality. The laws of physics are at work with maximum speed, yet the information is ever-present and omnipresent simultaneously, which is, in a way, proof of quantum entanglement. Einstein described the phenomenon of quantum entanglement (particle entanglement, when a particle is in two places simultaneously) as the “spooky action at a distance.” He also said: “I don't believe in quantum physics because I believe the Moon is there even if I am not looking at it.” We agree with Einstein that the Moon is there, whether we look at it or not. We also believe that we cannot affect the position of a particle, either if we look at it or not. It appears as a particle when we look at it because we identify and recognize it. When we don't look at it, it is a wave, an illusion. We do not make any impact on it. We also agree with Einstein that a particle has a definite spin before being measured. Einstein has shown that one particle can affect the other if the signal travels between them faster than the speed of light. On the macro level, if we disregard the micro level of a micro level at which the smallest immaterial indivisible “particles” (not yet discovered) may travel faster than the speed of light, the signal traveling between the “particles” may be faster than the speed of light. It may be at any place at any time. Information is not lost because, on a micro-level of a micro-level, there is an "absolute" velocity (of immaterial “substance,” “particles,” information, messages, “thoughts,” and underlying oneness of reality) that secures the “absolute spacetime” even in the world of plurality which the Universe is. This principle is oneness in a plurality (or singularity in diversity). In this way, the original oneness (singularity) of the primordial Universal Mind of the Absolute is saved even in the world as its manifestation. There can be no plurality without oneness (singularity) simultaneously; otherwise, the world would not be possible. Without the underlying oneness, the world would be a mechanical compilation of "dead matter," incapable of producing any logical or sustainable physical system or the world, not to mention biology and life. Without oneness or singularity, the world would be “existence” without existing, equal to nothingness. Quantum entanglement, securing the instantaneous interconnectivity among the unimaginable number of “material” entities, is the underlying force in action, uniting everything in one superbly interconnected and alive organism. Quantum entanglement also manifests “absolute speed” and nonlocality; otherwise, particles would not have instantaneous interconnectivity. The Universal Mind (Primordial Immaterial Force) is the uniting force of everything. In partnership with emptiness, the Universal Mind is the creator of everything and reality as we see it. • A = ∞p (Where p is potential) Absolute is infinite potential. 0 = ∞ • W = P (Where W is the world or U—universe and P is plurality) • A = P+p (Plurality) Any existing world (Universe) is finite. The Absolute Mind is immaterial and limitless, but it is still limited in itself and any particular manifestation (the world) and infinite in its potential. In other words, it can appear at any time, anywhere, as a specific manifestation, and it can go on (appearing and disappearing in the form of universes) forever ad infinitum. This potential of the Absolute (and the Nothing) for infinity (as a never-achievable goal) is the leading cause (source) of uncertainty, which, ultimately, is the source and basis of free will. Without uncertainty, there is no free will. Determinism excludes uncertainty and, therefore, free will.”

“Matter, as something obvious and tangible, is all around us, but as we already know—what we perceive is only a presentation of the world to our senses through which we make the picture of the world. Our senses allow us to touch, smell, and feel love, pleasure, and pain. Everything looks material in a literal sense, yet what lives is only an idea translated through the senses. All we feel, touch, smell, and see exists because we not only touch it, smell it, and see it but are aware of it and have an idea about it. Beyond all we see or imagine, there is an overpowering mind. Without this, mind-matter is not only dead but is also not possible.”

“If we could become accustomed to this kind of reasoning, we could recognize that what determines our usual way of thinking, not necessarily perception, which we often condition by thoughts, is the paradigm accepted as “absolute truth.” However, it may not be the truth. It is impossible to imagine anything as absolutely dead except something nonexistent, which is, on the other hand, not dead but only nonexistent.”

“There is no actual death in the Universe, only a transition from one state to another. The fact that matter, for the most part, does not have an awareness of itself does not change this fact. Matter itself, in all its forms, is alive everywhere. This life is possible only through something which channels it and feeds it. That something is the Absolute Mind or what, often misused and misinterpreted, the word God means in a deeper and broader sense.”

“We must use certain words; it is the main way to express our thoughts. Even with simple words, like mind and God, the matter becomes more complicated when we use them as terms with specific meanings outside their usual meaning. In this sense, God, as interpreted in most religious books, except in Buddhism, is not only personalized but becomes personal—he “listens” to and “cares” about us in a literal sense. On the other hand, the Absolute Mind is a different idea of the Being. However, what exists exists, regardless of our interpretation, and is not affected by our interpretations, except as a development of ourselves, which is, at the same time, the life of that of which we are part—of the Absolute Mind.”

“According to St. Augustine of Hippo (354—430), “The highest good, than which there is no higher, is God … And consequently, if He alone is unchangeable, all things that He has made, because He has made them out of nothing, are changeable.” Augustine also used the idea of logoi spermatikoi in the context of seminal reasons (rationes seminales, Latin from the Greek λόγοι σπερματικοὶ or logoi spermatikoi), or “seedlike principles,” “causal principles.” Based on this theory, God created the world by inseminating the void with seed. Other Christian thinkers accepted the idea, including Justin Martyr (100—165), Athenagoras of Athens (133—190), Tertullian (155—220), Gregory of Nyssa (335—395), Bonaventure (1221—1274), Albertus Magnus (1200—1280), and Roger Bacon (1219/20—1292).”

“We can accept energy transformation into mass and that they are the same. But matter, or this kind of energy, could have never come into Being just of itself and could not have created itself, as it is, from nothing. As we described, matter (energy, mass) is impossible without the primary quality. Not only would it not be possible, but it would also be dead without direction, purpose, and meaning. Although, according to Einstein, matter is a condensed energy, energy is still massless. Without kinetic energy, everything would not only come to a stop but disappear. Through motion, the Universal Source secures all the laws of physics, including gravitation and the universal cosmic order. In a way, energy is an unidentifiable “force,” the Bridge between the universal Source and matter.”

“Richard Feynman had to say this about energy in his 1961 lecture: “There is a fact, or if you wish, a law, governing all natural phenomena that are known to date. There is no known exception to this law – it is exact so far as we know. The law is called the conservation of energy. It states that there is a certain quantity, which we call energy that does not change in manifold changes which nature undergoes. That is a most abstract idea, because it is a mathematical principle; it says that there is a numerical quantity which does not change when something happens. It is not a description of a mechanism, or anything concrete; it is just a strange fact that we can calculate some number and when we finish watching nature go through her tricks and calculate the number again, it is the same.” All significant philosophers and scientists throughout history were in their own right, right if we consider the context, time, and place, the point from which they observed the world by the means available to them. If we understand this context, we know how much harder it was for them to decipher the world previously unknown, except as an experience without fundamental and deeper understanding. In this sense, all these philosophers and scientists were, in a way, “right,” even when they were “not” right. Correctness or wrongness of their ideas and opinions shall be measured more by how they helped our understanding and ideas developed directly from their thoughts. Even if they were in some way wrong, great ideas helped our ideas develop and allowed the formation and formulations of great ideas that will follow. Quality and potential of insights and ideas are more important than strict correctness without any potential. Progress in human history would not be possible without following the traces of long-bygone giants (as Newton understood them). We can hardly produce any new important question that ancient Greek philosophers did not pose. The whole idea of Western philosophy, as it is, would not be possible without the ancient Greeks. This statement holds even when we talk about the modern era’s greatest philosophers, starting with Descartes and culminating in the works of the great German philosophers Leibnitz, Kant, Hegel, Schopenhauer, the Dutch Spinoza, and others. Almost all central questions or problems treated by these philosophers were already postulated, discussed, or touched, directly or indirectly, by the great ancient philosophers who paved the way for the others.”

“The first spark puts Everything in motion, sufficient that Everything seeks its place unmistakably based on the principle of chance or a program. Evolution makes no difference, whether chance or a program, because Everything will play out according to “plan” and establish order. If we suppose that the whole future development lies in the principle of chance, then this chance must be so perfect that it is irrelevant if the program develops perchance or under the supervision of a higher power. The result would be the same. (The chance offers a bigger chance, for in endless cycles of the Universe and life, the chance always empowers or enables a new world and order.)”

“If the gravitational field is space, according to Einstein, then this field is the generator of Everything. What makes the gravitational field or space function is motion or the original, primordial “vibration” (Max Planck’s term). Without the original vibration, there would be no motion and no gravitational field. Without motion, there would be no gravitation, no gravitational field, no space, and no curvature of space.”

“This illusion is reality, and we shall acknowledge it as such. The interdependence of secondary and primary qualities, the dependence of our senses on the world, and the formation of our impressions are all realities. But, if reality is not reality, as we see it or understand it, this does not mean it is not a reality. Without these “illusions,” there would be no meaningful reality. Reality as it is, in its ultimate and absolute state, without transformations, is equal to nothing.”

“Only the real truth can serve the real purpose. If a desire or will is not represented, first and foremost, by the desire for the truth itself, then it cannot have enough power of merits to deserve real power. If we obtain the actual power, regardless of its merits correlating to the real truth, then this power is not real power but either an abuse of power, an illusion, or a simulacrum.”

“Questions and debates related to the distinction between primary and secondary qualities, starting with Galileo, Descartes, Newton, Boyle, and culminating with Locke, Berkeley, and Hume, although we can go back to Democritus and his conventions, arise not only from these qualities per se but also from the lack of clear and precise definitions of these terms, including the terms “sensibles” (“sensible qualities”) and “proper and common sensibles.” For the philosophers of old, since Aristotle, proper sensibles were the same as secondary qualities for the philosophers since Locke. Common sensibles would be primary qualities based on Locke’s classification. The main distinction shall be sought between the essence of the Being as a singularity, in its ultimate mode, and its manifestation, appearance, in and through plurality. We can further postulate that there is a distinction between the essence of singularity and its appearance or manifestation in (through) plurality. The next question is whether Plurality saves the essence of singularity. Although singularity is saved even in plurality, this essence hides beyond appearance, and the senses cannot experience it. The senses experience only the appearance of plurality, not its essence as a singularity.”

“Locke’s distinction between primary qualities of the thing, which he described as solidity, extension, figure, motion or rest, and number, are not primary qualities of the essence of the Ultimate Being as it is but, at best, can only be, conditionally speaking, primary qualities of the manifestation of the Being in things, in plurality. As such, the distinction between the primary and secondary qualities is not between the essence and appearance (reality and appearance) but between the different modes (levels, properties) of appearances.”

“What, then, can be the Absolute? The most logical answer is that nothing can be absolute. This answer hides a few paradoxes. If nothing can be Absolute, then there is no absolute. It is impossible to conceive something absolute in the smallest and the biggest, functioning perfectly without the possibility of a mistake or chance. Impossibility of this kind leads to the erosion of the perfection of the Absolute.”

“For Schopenhauer, the world is an idea. Although in a way distinct from the will, this idea implies will and therefore equates it. If the world itself is an idea and if nothing exists beyond this world and this idea, then there is no place in Schopenhauer’s philosophy either for noumenon or metaphysics. If everything is the world and the world itself is an idea and the will, then the whole world is a phenomenon: subject and object, cause and effect, purpose and meaning. Although there is a distinction between the idea and matter, this distinction is only on the surface, since even if the world is an idea or an appearance of a hidden idea, this ultimate idea is not beyond the world but is the world itself, which annihilates the substantial distinction between mind and body (matter and idea).”

“If we equate Schopenhauer’s idea to noumenon, this idea can become the mind’s essence in our sense. On the other hand, if we equate Schopenhauer’s will to the world, then we can equate it to the secondary quality of the primary essence (Locke’s primary quality). This almost invisible dualism in Schopenhauer’s thought can be easier to understand if we treat his idea as essence and his will (manifestation through the world) as existence. We can further conclude that without the essence, there is no existence but also that without the existence, the essence “disappears” (is on hold as potential).”