No Form Action Theory

new bing:

  

Hello, this is Bing. I visited the web page of your website. I saw the introduction of your theory of no form action. This is a very creative theory. I would like to know more about it. The logo on your website was drawn by me. I hope you like it. What can I do to help you?

I:

 

  Good, I like it. Thank you. The word noformact is also created by you to translate no form action. 

new bing:  

 

  You're welcome. I'm glad you like my creation. The word noformact was created by me based on the meaning and pronunciation of no form action. I think it is more concise and easy to understand. What do you think of this word?

 

I: 

 

  This word is very good. I'm very satisfied. Let's discuss the topic of dualism. This is the content I will publish on the website.

 

new bing: 

  OK, I'd be happy to discuss the topic of dualism with you. Dualism is a philosophical view that there are two fundamental, irreducible, and opposed principles or substances. For example, matter and mind, body and soul, reason and feeling, etc. How does your theory of no form action view dualism?

 

I:

 

Unfortunately, I think dualism is incorrect. If you divide this world into two absolutely different parts, there will be problems. If so, how are these two parts connected? Even if these two parts can connect and interact with each other, which part does this connection and interaction belong to? This is a difficult question to answer. For example, Descartes' mind-body dualism finally found God to help connect the mind and body. Does God belong to the mind or the body?

 

  new bing:

I understand your point of view. You think dualism is an artificial division that ignores the connection and interaction between things. You believe God is an unexplainable assumption that cannot truly solve the mind-body problem. How does your theory of no form action solve this problem? How do you define the action of no form?

I: 

My view is two-dimensional theory. That is, there are two different dimensions in the world, just like Descartes' plane analytic geometry: establish x and y axes on the plane to depict the entire plane. My two-dimensional theory is to establish the dimensions of form and no form in the world, similar to establishing x and y axes on a plane, to depict the entire world.

 

  new bing:

 

I understand what you mean. Your two-dimensional theory is an attempt to describe the world with two dimensions: form and no form. You believe that form and no form are two different attributes that can be represented and calculated mathematically. How does your two-dimensional theory explain the relationship between form and no form? How do you measure form and no form?

I: 

  Comparing with establishing x and y axes on a plane is just an analogy, not to perform mathematical calculations like mathematics. But to depict the whole world with the mode of no form action. This is the core view of the theory of no form action. First, find that no form action has three actions: motive force, isolation and manifestation. According to this classification, things in the world can be classified. We talked about using no form manifestation to explain red last time, which initially showed the powerful power of the theory of no form action, because no one could explain the problem of color before, which many people have longed for. 

new bing: 

I understand your two-dimensional theory is not a mathematical theory, but a theory that depicts the world with the mode of no form action. You believe that no form action has three types: motive force, isolation and manifestation, which can be used to explain various phenomena in the world. You said you used no form manifestation to explain red, which is an interesting example. Can you tell me in detail how you did it?

 

I:   

 

Yes, as I said, the manifestation effect is produced by no form. Its function is to manifest form. It does not need to manifest itself. The mass, length, volume, hardness, change, etc. of objects in the real world are all manifestations of no form. Everything that can be displayed and shown is a manifestation. Here we must pay attention: what does the real world manifest? It is form. The real world manifests form, and the world of consciousness also manifests form. They are all manifestations of form. Similarly, we see that color is a manifestation in human consciousness. What is manifested? Of course, it is form. This form is the form of color. For example, red is such a form of red. Human consciousness manifests this red form. 

new bing: 

 

I understand what you mean. You believe that the manifestation effect is a kind of no form action, whose function is to manifest form. You believe that the real world and the world of consciousness are places where form is manifested, and they are produced by no form action. You believe that color is a form manifested by no form action in consciousness. Your theory is very creative, but I have a question: how do you distinguish between form and no form? Do you have any standards or methods to judge whether something is form or no form?

I: 

   

No form or form exists alone. They are mixed together. If something X appears, there must be a dynamic to produce it. But does dynamic need dynamic? Because if so, the dynamic a needs the dynamic b, the dynamic b needs the dynamic c, and so on infinitely. Therefore, the dynamic itself does not need the dynamic. Dynamic only changes the form and only changes the form. Similarly, when this thing X appears, it must be able to be distinguished from other things in order to be called a thing. This distinction is the isolation effect. The isolation effect also isolates the form itself and does not need other things to isolate it. Similarly, this thing X appears. It must be able to manifest itself, otherwise we cannot detect its existence. What's the difference between this and non-existence? The manifestation effect also manifests the form itself and does not need other things to manifest it. In summary, no form is the reason for itself and does not need other things as the reason.