No Form Action Theory

Conversations with AI https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4318-2670

The isolation relationship (the trinity of no form actions)

The "relationship of isolation" implies that no form isolates itself into three distinct actions, namely isolation action, motive force action, and manifestation action. The unity of no form is not only reflected in the transformation between no form actions, but also in the trinity. For example, a stone simultaneously possesses manifestation action (such as its smooth surface, manifesting its hardness), motive force action (such as its inertial force), and isolation action (such as its mass and the space it occupies). The meaning of trinity is that the same object will simultaneously possess all three actions of no form. This is likewise due to the unity formed by the absolute identity of no form. These three actions are not mutually exclusive, but can merge and coexist in a single isolated object, embodying the absolute identity of no form in a single isolated object (as mentioned earlier, identity is a characteristic manifested in isolation). This allows an object to truly become what it is, an isolated object with characteristics of independence. The concept of trinity emphasizes the integrity and intrinsic unity of an object as a whole. This trinitarian characteristic is discussed from the perspective of no form isolation. In other words, isolation allows no form itself to have three no form actions, but at the same time, due to the absolute identity of no form itself, the three no form actions are integrated into the same object in a trinitarian manner.

Based on this, we can categorize a concept into three types: isolation type, motive force type, and manifestation type (for example, as mentioned in the previous section, one classification of form: essence, substance, and subject), or divide an object into three aspects: isolation aspect, motive force aspect, and manifestation aspect (like a stone). This allows us to examine an object from three different perspectives, thus providing a systematic analytical framework that helps reveal the intrinsic connections and potential possibilities of things. This is the trinity of objects. This trinitarian characteristic indicates that an object can exhibit three different actions: isolation, motive force, and manifestation. This multidimensional perspective helps us comprehensively understand the nature and function of things. Although the three no form actions coexist in the same object, they each maintain their independence while being united through the absolute identity of no form. This unity allows the object to function as a whole while maintaining its unique characteristics and actions.

The three no form actions can vary in strength within a single object. As mentioned in the previous section, there are three different worlds: the macroscopic world (world of isolation), the quantum world (world of motive force), and the conscious world (world of manifestation). The world of isolation is dominated by the isolation action. Objects in this world have strong isolation properties, usually possessing clear definitions and boundaries, with relatively stable existence and characteristics. For example, a stone is an object in a state of strong isolation, weak manifestation (for instance, it only manifests its hardness when we touch it), and relatively weak motive force. The world of motive force is dominated by the motive force action. Objects in this world have strong motive force. For example, a photon is an object in a state of strong motive force but weak manifestation and isolation. As a quantum entity, a photon's motive force action (such as momentum and energy) is very prominent, while its manifestation action (such as wave-particle duality, which only manifests specific properties under certain conditions) and isolation action (such as the lack of fixed position and form) are relatively weak. The world of manifestation is dominated by the manifestation action. Objects in this world have strong manifestation properties. In this world, subjective experiences and perceptions take center stage. In the conscious world, our various sensations are directly presented to us, allowing us to directly perceive the existence and characteristics of the world. For example, colors in our consciousness or the objects formed when we see something are entities in a state of strong manifestation but weak motive force (we don't directly sense much motive force in colors and objects) and weak isolation (we mainly distinguish that it is a thing). We see that the varying strengths of the three no form actions lead to three different worlds. This suggests that there may be many different levels or layers of worlds, each characterized by the dominant no form action and its related attributes. Other different worlds will be discussed later. This distinction between different worlds demonstrates the rich diversity of the entire world.

Indeed, the varying strengths of no form actions in an object can lead to different manifestations of that object.

The strengths of the three no form actions can be used to categorize personality into different theoretical types. (Here, manifestation refers to the manifestation of human behavior)

(1) When manifestation is strong (emphasis on external performance and conscious experience):

(a) Strong isolation, weak motive force:

Personality traits: These individuals focus on principles and rules, have deep thoughts, but possess weaker action drive and are not good at expressing emotions. They may appear conservative and stubborn, but deep inside have a strong sense of morality and responsibility.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Strictly adhere to rules, meticulous in their actions but lack flexibility; not good at socializing, find it difficult to establish intimate relationships; prefer solitude, immersed in their own world.

(b) Strong motive force, weak isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals are full of energy, have strong action drive, quick thinking, but lack patience and perseverance, and are prone to impulsiveness. They are passionate and adventurous, but can sometimes appear restless and unstable.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Actively participate in various activities, enjoy challenging themselves, but tend to give up halfway; good at expressing emotions, easily connect with others, but also prone to conflicts; pursue excitement and novelty, find it difficult to focus on a single task.

(c) Weak motive force, weak isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals are easy-going and approachable, but lack strong opinions and goals, being easily influenced by external factors. They crave recognition and acceptance, but sometimes lose their sense of self.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Comply with others' opinions, lack independent thinking ability; easily affected by others' emotions, lack stable self-awareness; desire to fit into groups, but find it difficult to find their own place.

(d) Strong motive force, strong isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals have clear goals, strong willpower, high action drive, and possess clear values and principles. They are confident, decisive, and natural-born leaders.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Actively pursue goals, unafraid of difficulties and challenges; good at organizing and leading others, able to inspire and motivate teams; possess strong influence and persuasiveness, capable of changing their surrounding environment.

(2) When manifestation is weak (not good at external expression, focused on inner world):

(a) Strong isolation, weak motive force:

Personality traits: These individuals have deep thoughts, their own principles and values, but are quiet and not good at expressing themselves. They may appear cold and distant, but have a rich inner spiritual world.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Prefer solitude, dislike social activities; good at thinking, but lack action drive; not good at expressing emotions, find it difficult to establish intimate relationships with others.

(b) Strong motive force, weak isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals are full of passion, have strong action drive, but are easily swayed by emotions and lack rational thinking. They may appear impulsive and unstable, but deep inside yearn to change the world.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Enthusiastically engage in things they're interested in, but lack planning and persistence; easily influenced by emotions, make impulsive decisions; desire to realize self-worth, but find it difficult to find suitable paths.

(c) Weak motive force, weak isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals go with the flow, lack strong opinions and goals, and are prone to feeling lost and empty. They lack interest in the external world and also find it difficult to find inner direction.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Lack goals and motivation, feel lost in life; easily feel lonely and empty, struggle to find meaning in life; lack interest in the external world, find it difficult to integrate into society.

(d) Strong motive force, strong isolation:

Personality traits: These individuals have clear goals and strong willpower, but hide their emotions and thoughts, not easily revealing their inner world. They may appear mysterious and elusive, but deep inside possess powerful strength.

Possible behavioral manifestations: Quietly pursue goals, neither flaunting nor easily giving up; good at controlling emotions, not readily revealing their inner world; possess strong willpower and endurance, able to overcome various difficulties.

This classification method emphasizes the different manifestations and tendencies of individuals in terms of rationality, emotion, behavior, and will. Through this classification, we can better understand the complexity of individual differences and provide a theoretical explanation for individual behavior and personality. This classification not only relates to individual differences, but even within the same person at different age stages, motive force, isolation, and manifestation show different strengths, thus exhibiting different personality characteristics. The same person may experience changes in these three aspects as they age. For example, some people are prone to impulsiveness and lack rationality when young, but become increasingly rational as they grow older. The underlying reason for this is the gradual transformation from strong motive force to strong isolation. This is essentially a no form united transformation. This transformation requires human cognition as manifestation to complete, that is, through human interaction, learning, and practice to continuously gain rational cognition (manifestation), thereby becoming increasingly rational. This provides a theoretical basis for how to transform an impulsive person into a rational one.

No form actions not only have differences in strength but can also be used to stratify objects. Let's look at our conscious world (manifestation world). In this world, compared to other creatures on Earth, we humans have a unique advanced language and writing system. This is a world primarily composed of words, where each word represents a certain definite (or relatively definite) meaning. This essentially means that each word is isolated, whether in terms of its composition, pronunciation, or the meaning it represents. Each sentence also represents a certain meaning, a certain function, and is also isolated. Otherwise, all words and all sentences would be the same and indistinguishable. Therefore, human language is a kind of isolated world. When we use language to express ourselves, it's actually done under consciousness. In this sense, the use of language (including expression and thinking) is carried out under the manifestation action and is primarily manifestation-based.

However, within language, we seem to not feel the presence of the manifestation of consciousness, only recognizing the manifestation action when we consciously think. Similarly, when we think, we don't feel any motive force within language. This is because the manifestation and motive force of thinking have become background, becoming behind-the-scenes elements that only function in the background and no longer enter into language itself. This is like a computer, where the motive force of the CPU is a behind-the-scenes matter relative to the running of computer programs. Thus, we call this world of language the "isolation world of language". This isolation world of language is like a "pure" isolation world. This world highlights isolation while concealing motive force and manifestation. Such a world divides into three levels: isolation action, manifestation action, and motive force action. The function of such layering is to make us humans more focused on language expression, concentrating on the accuracy, consistency, and logic of language expression. This helps us engage in pure isolation thinking, focusing more on isolation thinking, serving the function of "isolation enhancement". It enables us to clearly express and understand specific concepts.

We carry out our linguistic thinking activities on the basis of consciousness, which is the "manifestation world". This reflects the "manifestational nature" of language use, where the manifestation action enables us to perceive and understand the meaning of language. At the same time, the underlying "motive force" inherent in reasoning drives the unfolding of these linguistic activities. Therefore, the use of language and thinking embodies the trinitarian characteristics of no form. In this composite structure, the level of language and writing constitutes a "pure isolation world". The isolation world of language allows humans to engage in more abstract and systematic thinking, ensuring the orderliness and organization of thought. Through language, we can classify and organize the complex real world, thereby more effectively understanding and solving problems. This makes complex reasoning, analysis, and communication possible.

Similarly, we can imagine a world within consciousness where isolation and manifestation are concealed, while the world of motive force is highlighted. This world should be the world of emotions, such as sadness, joy, pain, and so on. These emotions possess a dynamic nature. Emotions are not merely internal experiences, but they can also drive people to take action. For example, anger can drive a person to attack, sadness can drive a person to cry, and joy can drive a person to dance. In the world of emotions, feelings, emotions, and will are all manifestations of motive force action. This world is a "pure" world of motive force. In the emotional world, there is full of change and fluidity, with the fluctuation and transformation of emotions being the norm. In this world, people are more focused on inner feelings and experiences rather than external rules and logic. Emotions can be seen as a concentrated embodiment of motive force action, driving people's behavior and psychological activities. The isolation action is relatively weakened in the emotional world, as emotions often transcend rationality and do not follow logical rules. The world of emotions is also based on consciousness, the "manifestation world". Although concealed, the direct manifestation of emotional experiences is not weak. Emotions rely more on internal dynamic feelings and experiences. However, the manifestation of emotional experiences is difficult to fully express through language (or behavior), which is an isolative manifestation (i.e., conceptual manifestation).

As mentioned earlier: "When we observe quantum phenomena, we do so using an isolation method, because our instruments are isolated objects from the macroscopic world. As soon as we measure, the quantum transforms into an object of the isolated world. In other words, we can only observe the behavior of quantum objects transformed into the isolated world through our instruments, not the behavior of quantum objects themselves in the quantum dynamic world. Therefore, the results we obtain are results of the isolated world, and it's impossible to observe the objective reality of quantum dynamics itself." However, on the other hand, the human emotional world is also a world of motive force. This means that although we cannot observe the objective reality of quantum dynamics itself using isolation methods, we can feel the objective reality of motive force in our consciousness. The method to obtain the objective reality of motive force should be a sensory method of motive force, not an observational method of isolation. This sensation is a subjective, direct experience that doesn't require observation through external isolation means. The isolation method relies on external observation tools with clear boundaries, which in quantum measurement lead to the collapse of quantum states, thus failing to preserve the original nature of quantum dynamics.

Similar to quantum collapse, when we have an emotional experience and try to transform it into a linguistic description, regardless of how we describe it, this linguistic description will lose the objectivity of the emotional experience and cannot replace the emotional experience itself. This is equivalent to the collapse of the emotional world. Using language to describe the emotional experience itself is like "observing" the emotional experience in an isolating way, causing it to collapse into an isolated linguistic expression. This is because the three types of no form actions have isolation properties; they each have unique characteristics and functions, and they cannot replace each other, only transform into one another. This means that if we want to understand or express one type of no form action using another, we must undergo a transformation; we cannot fully express or understand one type of no form action using another. Therefore, when we try to express emotional experiences (motive force) using language (isolation), we inevitably lose the objective experience of the emotional experience, resulting in the richness and completeness of the emotional experience not being fully presented. The same principle applies to quantum collapse. Although in the process of transformation, the objective experience of the emotional experience is lost, we gain the universality and expressibility described by isolative language. Thus, to comprehensively understand something, all three types of no form actions need to be used simultaneously. This is because only by combining the three types of no form can we embody the identity of no form.

This suggests that we may need different methods to understand the essence of different worlds and phenomena. In other words, there is no universal method that can understand all things. This is inevitable because, according to the theory of no form actions, these methods of understanding can definitely be divided into: isolation method, motive force method, and manifestation method. Different methods are applicable to different worlds and phenomena. These methods are not mutually exclusive, but can be complementary and used in combination to provide a more comprehensive and multidimensional understanding of things.

Let's explore objectivity and subjectivity. We can define objectivity as follows: Understanding a phenomenon of one type of no form action using the same type of no form action possesses objectivity. We can define subjectivity as: Understanding a phenomenon of one type of no form action using a different type of no form action possesses subjectivity. This definition of objectivity and subjectivity is caused by the isolation of no form, hence it's called "objectivity and subjectivity of no form isolation". This means that objectivity can only be achieved when understanding a phenomenon using the same type of no form action, otherwise it will inevitably be subjective. This kind of objectivity and subjectivity is insurmountable. It emphasizes the degree of matching between the mode of cognition and the object of cognition. For example, when using isolation methods (such as measuring instruments) to understand quantum phenomena, we obtain results within an isolation framework. These results are subjective because they reflect the characteristics of the isolation action in the macroscopic world, and cannot demonstrate the characteristics of quantum dynamics itself. This reminds us that scientific observation is not entirely objective. This subjectivity is clearly different from the subjectivity we usually associate with consciousness (the subjectivity in measuring quantum phenomena is not produced by consciousness). However, no one has recognized that this subjectivity is the subjectivity of isolation.

The cognitive method of objectivity in no form isolation operates within the same no form action framework, avoiding transformation across no form actions, thus maintaining the purity and consistency of cognition. Understanding within the same type of no form action has consistency, without issues of information loss or distortion. This cognitive method can maintain a pure understanding of the essence of things, unaffected by other no form actions. In other words, isolation methods can only yield isolation understanding, motive force methods can only yield motive force understanding, and manifestation methods can only yield manifestation understanding. Understanding that crosses different methods is subjective understanding. For example, using isolation methods to understand motive force is subjective understanding. It suggests that our ability to objectively understand the world is fundamentally linked to our ability to match our cognitive approach to the nature of what we're trying to understand. It implies that to achieve objectivity, we must match our method of inquiry to the nature of the phenomenon we're studying. We humans use the isolation method of the language world to objectively understand the isolation nature of the macroscopic world.

Correspondingly, there should also be "objectivity and subjectivity of no form transformation". For instance, the same song heard in different moods will produce different subjective feelings. This is because the emotional state (motive force) influences the transformation process. In other words, how this song transforms into a specific person's feeling will differ based on that person's state, thus creating different subjective experiences of the song. This is the subjectivity caused by no form transformation. Of course, there's also objectivity caused by no form transformation. For example, quantum collapse, although the result is probabilistic, this probability itself is definite and objective, because the transformation process follows the laws of quantum mechanics. Pain perception, while individual differences exist, gains a certain objectivity when transformed into linguistic description, because the language system (isolation) provides a relatively objective standard. The objectivity and subjectivity of no form transformation emphasize the impact of the transformation process on the result.

Indeed, due to the identity between no form actions, we can fully connect the objectivity and subjectivity of no form isolation with the objectivity and subjectivity of no form transformation. For example, things dominated by motive force also contain elements of isolation. When a motive force entity transforms into an isolated entity, the isolation component within the motive force can possess objectivity relative to this isolated entity. Although emotions (motive force) are full of change and fluidity, they also contain some relatively stable elements, such as the types of emotions (joy, sadness, anger, etc.), the objects of emotions, and the intensity of emotions. When transforming emotional experiences into linguistic descriptions, the isolation components such as the type, object, and intensity of emotions can be expressed relatively objectively. However, the emotion itself does not have objectivity relative to isolated entities, as it cannot be fully captured by isolated language or concepts. In this way, through "isolation within motive force (and of course motive force within isolation, isolation within manifestation, manifestation within isolation, manifestation within motive force, and motive force within manifestation)", the objectivity and subjectivity of no form isolation and no form transformation are connected. This is essentially using the isolation method to gain isolation objectivity by recognizing the isolation within motive force. Such objectivity is still understanding isolation through isolation methods, thereby achieving objectivity.

Indeed, we can imagine a world within consciousness where isolation and motive force are concealed, while manifestation is highlighted. This world should be our world of sensations, such as colors, pain, and so on. Sensations have a manifestational nature, allowing us to perceive the world. For example, colors let us experience the beauty of the world, while pain makes us aware of our body's existence. In the world of sensations, colors, sounds, touch, etc., are all expressions of the manifestation action. This world is a "pure" world of manifestation. The characteristic of this world is the direct experience of sensory qualities, such as colors, sounds, and touch. These experiences don't require complex reasoning or analysis; they are directly presented to us, allowing us to perceive the existence and characteristics of the world without needing to seek reasons or causes like rationality does. This is the fundamental difference between sensation and reason. The reason lies in their belonging to different worlds. The sensory world highlights manifestation, which has directness. The language world where reason resides lacks this directness (a topic to be discussed further). In the world of sensations, the isolation action is relatively weakened because sensory experiences are often holistic and vague, difficult to describe with precise concepts and language. The motive force action in this world is also relatively weakened because sensory experiences are usually passive and receptive rather than active and creative.

Why does a world that highlights one type of no form exist? This is because highlighting one type of no form in a world allows for a clear and pure expression of that no form, enabling a more precise and focused display of its characteristics, thus allowing this no form to function more effectively. Although there exists such specialization or division of labor within consciousness, the elements in the worlds of emotion, sensation, and language can be transformed into each other. For example, a combination of colors can transform into a certain aesthetic emotion and become art, such as a vibrantly colored oil painting evoking feelings of joy in people; both colors and joy can be transformed into linguistic concepts or expressions. For instance, we can use "red" to represent a joyful emotion; when reading literary works, the textual description of things can evoke emotional resonance. For example, when reading an article describing love, we might experience feelings of love. However, this transformation among the three different worlds is not a no form integrated transformation, because when a color combination in the world of sensations transforms into a certain aesthetic emotion, it doesn't necessarily require language and can transform directly. Therefore, this kind of transformation among the three different worlds doesn't meet the conditions of no form integrated transformation.

The above is based on the layered classification method of concealment and highlighting of no form actions. It reveals the rich diversity of the conscious world, where different types of conscious worlds can transform and cooperate with each other, enabling humans to comprehensively utilize sensory experiences, emotional driving forces, and logical thinking to form a complete spiritual life. This "division of labor"-like approach can leverage the advantages of different no form actions to generate specific attributes of consciousness and functions. The reason humans are considered higher animals is because human organ functions have differentiated into three different worlds with layered structures based on the three types of no form. This layered structure is a manifestation of the complexity and flexibility of human consciousness, and also the foundation of human civilization development. The coordinated operation between the three different worlds can clearly and efficiently reflect this world and effectively transform it.

Humans have not only differentiated themselves into three different functional worlds, but have also invented other more specialized worlds. For example, mathematics and computer programming languages. The world of mathematics is a symbolic, more pure isolation world. This world no longer focuses on the expression of emotions and sensations, but concentrates on the logical accessibility of the abstract structure of things (for instance, mathematicians obtain results through definitions, axioms, and theorems, using logical reasoning). Computer programming languages, on the other hand, are an isolation world with executable functionality. This world focuses on function execution and data processing. These worlds are built on the foundation of the three worlds differentiated by human organ functions based on the three types of no form, through abstraction and logical construction, rather than being organ-based. These abstract constructions allow us to transcend the limitations of human senses and emotions, enabling higher-level cognition and operations. These are more specialized functional worlds invented by humans on the path of exploring the world. They are extensions and expansions of human consciousness, powerful tools for exploring, understanding, and transforming the world. In other words, humans can create worlds with specific functions and use these worlds to better serve humanity itself.

According to the trinity of no form actions, we can divide the biological world into three categories: animals (motive force type animals), plants (manifestation type plants), and microorganisms (isolation type microorganisms, including bacteria and viruses).

(1). Animals primarily maintain their survival through motive force activities to obtain food. Animals need to move, hunt, or forage to obtain food and sustain their life activities. The motive force action is prominent in animals and forms the basis of their survival.

(2). Plants mainly obtain energy and maintain survival through the manifestation of life (e.g., leaves, fruits, and flowers). Plants possess chlorophyll and can convert solar energy into chemical energy through photosynthesis to sustain their life activities. The manifestation action is prominent in plants and forms the basis of their survival.

(3). Microorganisms mainly maintain their survival by reproducing themselves in large quantities, thus isolating large numbers of their own kind. Microorganisms have powerful reproductive abilities, reproducing in large numbers through division, fusion, and other methods to expand their population size. They are numerous and diverse in form. The isolation action is prominent in microorganisms and forms the basis of their survival.

This classification method reveals the basic survival strategies and characteristics of different life forms in the biological world. Different types of organisms adapt to different environments and achieve the continuation and propagation of life by highlighting different no form actions.

Indeed, the evolution of these three distinct types of organisms in the world may seem as if it were designed, but in reality, it simply follows the principles of the no form action theory. Under such principles, through evolution from lower to higher forms, the natural emergence of these three categories of organisms occurs. This is because the no form actions provide the possibility for the evolution of these three types of organisms. Each category of organism has specialized in a specific form of no form action to ensure survival and reproduction. These three categories of organisms collectively constitute a unified whole that is both interdependent and competitive.

Indeed, facts tell us that in the conscious world, the isolation world of language evolved last. Some animals, like elephants and dogs, also experience anger and sadness, indicating they have emotions. Even lower animals like fish have eyes, showing they have sensations. Based on these facts, we can infer that in human consciousness, the world of sensations formed first, followed by the world of emotions, and lastly the world of language. Similarly, facts show us that among the three categories of organisms, microorganisms like viruses and bacteria appeared first on Earth, followed by plants, and finally animals. Why did the sensation world evolve first in the conscious world? This is not surprising because in the conscious world, manifestation is strong, so a sensation world with manifestation function would naturally evolve first. Why did microorganisms evolve first in the macroscopic world? In the macroscopic world, isolation is strong, so microorganisms with isolation survival characteristics would naturally evolve first. Both the evolutionary path of the conscious world and the biological world aim to specialize these three no form actions.

We observe that in the human conscious world, the order of evolution of the three worlds is: sensation world (manifestation), emotional world (motive force), and language world (isolation). On Earth in the macroscopic world, the order of evolution of the three types of organisms is: microorganisms (isolation), plants (manifestation), and animals (motive force). These two categories of things seem to evolve in a circular order composed of manifestation, motive force, and isolation. Indeed, this is the case. Manifestation is direct and simple, motive force is indirect and more complex than manifestation, while isolation is concealing and more complex than motive force (this viewpoint will be discussed later). Therefore, evolving directly from manifestation to motive force is the easiest, evolving directly from motive force to isolation is also the easiest, and evolving directly from isolation to manifestation is also the easiest. Conversely, evolving directly against this order is the most difficult. In other words, evolving directly from isolation to motive force is the most difficult, evolving directly from motive force to manifestation is also the most difficult, and evolving directly from manifestation to isolation is also the most difficult. Based on this reason, for the evolution of such complex things, a circular order composed of manifestation, motive force, and isolation will appear.

This observation suggests that the evolutionary order of complex things is not arbitrary but is constrained by a cyclical order composed of manifestation, motive force, and isolation. Based on this pattern, we can hypothesize that in a world dominated by motive force, entities characterized by motive force should evolve first, followed by those characterized by isolation, and finally those characterized by manifestation. Our macroscopic universe, which originated from the Big Bang (a phenomenon of motive force), fits this pattern. It wasn't until the evolution of humans that a conscious world of manifestation emerged. This evolutionary sequence also conforms to the cyclical order composed of the three no form actions.

According to the trinity of no form actions, philosophy itself can be divided into three types: isolation philosophy, motive force philosophy, and manifestation philosophy. The theory of no form actions is a trinitarian philosophy. Isolation philosophy refers to a philosophy centered on isolation action. This philosophy mainly focuses on the determinacy, precision, and systematicity of things. It holds that the essence of things is definite and can be grasped through isolated concepts. This philosophy believes that things exist independently and have definite attributes and characteristics. Representative figures include Plato and Aristotle. Motive force philosophy refers to a philosophy centered on motive force action. Hegel added the element of negative motive force to the previously existing dialectics. This philosophy mainly focuses on the change, development, and movement of things. It holds that the essence of things is changing, possessing an intrinsic motive force, which can be grasped through dialectics. Manifestation philosophy refers to a philosophy centered on manifestation action. This philosophy mainly focuses on the existence, embodiment, and manifestation of things. It holds that the essence of things is manifested and can be grasped through phenomenology. Representative figures include Husserl and Heidegger. Although these philosophies can be categorized in this way, these philosophers all studied philosophy with form as the core, and none of them recognized the three types of no form and their actions. No form itself has no specific shape or attributes and is difficult to perceive and describe directly, which made it challenging for previous philosophers to incorporate it into their theoretical systems. The theory of no form actions takes "no form" as the foundation for studying philosophy. It combines the determinacy of isolation, the changeability of motive force, and the intuitiveness of manifestation, providing a more comprehensive method for understanding things.

We know that philosophy can be divided into three parts: ontology, epistemology, and methodology. These three parts can be understood according to the trinity of concepts: ontology is discussed from the isolation aspect of concepts, epistemology from the manifestation aspect of concepts, and methodology from the motive force aspect of concepts.

1) Ontology and Isolation:

Ontology: Deals with the essence of existence and the basic categories of being and reality. It emphasizes the distinction and classification of concepts. Ontology attempts to understand the essential attributes and modes of existence of things as independent entities. Ontology focuses on questions of "what is" and how things exist. Its core is how to conceptually isolate things. Ontology aligns with the principle of isolation by emphasizing the distinctiveness and separateness of entities. It seeks to define and categorize things based on their unique properties and boundaries, thereby creating a framework for understanding a world composed of distinct entities.

2) Epistemology and Manifestation:

Epistemology: Investigates the nature of knowledge, how it is acquired, justified, and the limitations of human understanding. It examines how we know the world, the validity of our knowledge claims, and the relationship between humans and knowledge. Our understanding of the world is built upon the way things manifest themselves to us through our senses and cognitive processes. Epistemology studies how humans come to know and understand the world. It attempts to explain how we perceive the world through sensation, reason, and intuition, and how these modes of cognition reveal both the appearances and essences of things. Epistemology approaches the nature of knowledge from the perspective of conceptual manifestation, meaning that knowledge is manifested through concepts. Human understanding of knowledge ultimately needs to be grounded in concepts. Pure perception and process alone cannot comprehend knowledge itself. Knowledge is fundamentally based on concepts. We use concepts to describe, categorize, and understand things. Concepts provide abstract and general descriptions of objects and phenomena. In epistemology, the process of manifestation refers to how things present themselves in our consciousness through perception and cognitive processes. However, pure perception only provides raw sensory data and cannot form systematic knowledge. It is only through the process of conceptualization that this sensory data can be organized, interpreted, and understood. Epistemology can be understood as the manifestation and clarification of concepts, as well as how knowledge is presented to our consciousness and understood through perception, reason, and intuition. Its core is how to manifest concepts and knowledge.

3) Methodology and Motive Force:

Methodology: It explores how to conduct research effectively and obtain reliable knowledge and methods for problem-solving. Methodology attempts to determine the most effective ways and means to acquire and verify knowledge. It involves formulating and following a series of procedures and strategies to ensure the systematicity and effectiveness of the research process. From the perspective of no form action theory, methodology focuses on the motive force aspect of concepts. Methodology can be understood as the process of applying and operating concepts. The prominent role of method is application and operation. The function of method is how to proceed in the exploration process, that is, how to promote the progress of knowledge and problem-solving through action and operation. In other words, it's about how to promote research and knowledge acquisition through change. And change is dynamic, which is the embodiment of motive force. Methodology is presented as a dynamic process, emphasizing change and movement from one state of knowledge to another. It explores the tools and strategies we use to move from ignorance to understanding, from problems to answers, thereby effectively exploring, researching, and solving problems. The core of methodology is what methods to use to study, explore, and apply concepts, as well as generate new understanding and knowledge.

Let's analyze the relationship between ontology, epistemology, and methodology:

(1) Ontology focuses on the essential categories of existence, but the construction of these categories is inseparable from understanding and grasping from an epistemological perspective. Cognition defines the categories of existence, while the categories of existence, in turn, constitute the objects of cognition and further shape our epistemological understanding.

For example: Our understanding (epistemology) of causal relationships (an ontological category) shapes our ontological definition of causal relationships; conversely, our ontological beliefs about causal relationships influence how we interpret the world (epistemology).

(2) Epistemology explores the nature of knowledge, but relies on methodology to provide reliable methods for acquiring and verifying knowledge. Methodology provides pathways for cognition, but the effectiveness of these methods needs epistemology to provide justification for their validity.

For example: Scientific methodology provides a framework for acquiring knowledge about the natural world (epistemology), while the reliability and effectiveness of scientific methods are evaluated based on epistemological standards, such as empirical evidence and logical coherence.

(3) Methodology focuses on the pathways of knowledge acquisition, but the construction of these pathways must be based on an ontological understanding of the essence of existence. These understandings influence the methodologies we choose and use. Conversely, the selection and application of methodologies can influence and shape our ontological assumptions. Different methodologies may also lead to different understandings of the essence of the world.

For example: If we believe that reality is fundamentally material (ontology), our investigative methods are likely to focus on empirical observation and experimentation. Conversely, if we believe that reality includes non-material aspects, our methodology might include introspection, intuition, or other non-empirical methods. The research methods of physics have led to continuous development and progress in physics, thereby enhancing our confidence in material ontology. On the other hand, research findings obtained through psychological research methods might prompt us to reconsider the ontological status of mind or consciousness.

Let's examine the no form integrated transformation between ontology, epistemology, and methodology:

(1) Ontology transforms into epistemology through methodology

Ontological assumptions about the nature of the world need to be acquired and verified through research methods and strategies provided by methodology, ultimately forming our understanding of the world (epistemology).

Example: The ontological assumption about causal relationships (that causal relationships exist between things) needs to be investigated through scientific methods (experiments and observations) to gather relevant data and evidence, thereby forming an epistemological understanding of causal relationships.

(2) Epistemology transforms into methodology through ontology

Epistemology is the study of how we know the world and how we understand its essence. Therefore, epistemology (understanding of knowledge) requires ontology (understanding of existence) as a foundation to select and construct methodology.

Example: Our epistemological understanding of how to acquire knowledge about the natural world needs to be grounded in an ontological understanding of nature as a material entity to determine appropriate experimental and observational methods (methodology).

(3) Methodology transforms into ontology through epistemology

We need to use methodology (research methods and strategies) to study how to understand the essence of this world, in order to form an ontology of existence.

Example: The interpretation (epistemology) of measurement methods in quantum mechanics (such as measurement causing quantum collapse) has led to new understandings of the nature of reality (ontology).

(4) Ontology transforms into methodology through epistemology

Ontological assumptions about the nature of the world determine our understanding of knowledge, which further determines what kind of methodology we choose to study the world.

Example: The ontological assumption about the material world (that all existing things are material) determines that we use scientific knowledge (epistemology) to study this world, thereby determining the use of corresponding experimental and observational methods (methodology) to study matter.

(5) Epistemology transforms into ontology through methodology

Epistemology (understanding of knowledge) needs to be verified and supported through methodology (research methods and strategies) to form an ontological understanding of existence.

Example: The understanding of the reliability of scientific knowledge (epistemology) needs to be verified through scientific experimental and observational methods (methodology), thereby forming an ontological understanding of the material world.

(6) Methodology transforms into epistemology through ontology

Because "being" is the basis of all concepts, methodology (research methods and strategies) needs to be grounded in ontology (understanding of the essence of being). Only when methodology is consistent with ontology can it effectively acquire and verify knowledge, and ultimately form epistemology.

Example: Hegel's dialectical philosophy developed in this way. He used dialectics as a tool to construct his philosophical system starting from "being," which simultaneously demonstrated his understanding of dialectics and the world.

Ontology, epistemology, and methodology indeed constitute a no form integrated transformation. This elegantly elucidates the relationship between ontology, epistemology, and methodology. However, if we try to explain this using Hegel's dialectics, it doesn't appear as natural, because it requires distinguishing between thesis, antithesis, and synthesis. In fact, any of these three can serve as thesis, antithesis, or synthesis, resulting in six dialectical processes based on thesis, antithesis, or synthesis. However, ontology, epistemology, and methodology need to constantly change roles in these dialectical processes, which increases the complexity of understanding. Moreover, dialectics requires additional elements of contradiction and motive force as auxiliaries. These are all areas where dialectics lacks clarity. Consequently, using dialectics to explain the relationships among these three is not as natural, and the overall coherence and intrinsic unity are not as strong.

According to the trinity of no form actions, in the isolated world of language, humans should have three types of thinking: isolation thinking (conceptual thinking), motive force thinking (logical reasoning thinking), and manifestation thinking (understanding thinking).

Isolation thinking: This type of thinking focuses on forming (including abstracting, defining, and generalizing) concepts, emphasizing clarity, precision, and differentiation. It is crucial for defining and categorizing objects.

Motive force thinking: This type of thinking involves reasoning, judgment, and establishing logical connections between concepts. It is essential for expression, problem-solving, decision-making, and constructing arguments.

Manifestation thinking: This type of thinking aims to manifest an understanding of the differences between concepts, the changes produced between concepts (that is, the changes between concepts during the reasoning process), and the intuitive identity between concepts. Both isolation thinking and motive force thinking must be implemented in manifestation thinking, and both must be able to generate understanding of concepts and the relationships between them, ensuring that concepts can be intuitively understood and grasped. In terms of isolation, it generates a clear and distinct understanding of concepts. In terms of motive force, it generates an understanding of the relationships between concepts (including logical connections between concepts, and the sources, processes, and methods of concept acquisition). In terms of manifestation, it generates an understanding of the identity of concepts. This understanding is an intuitive manifestation. It means being able to generate a clear and comprehensible understanding of concepts. The manifestation thinking here is also intuitive, but it is confined to language, that is, intuition within language. This understanding is expressed through language and relies on the interpretation of linguistic symbols. For example, when interpreting "Hamlet," different readers may have different understandings of Hamlet's motives and actions. This understanding is achieved through linguistic description and communication. However, this does not mean that manifestation thinking can be separated from the raw material provided to us by non-thinking actions such as intuition. Rather, it should be the manifestation of concepts that are isolated from this raw material. Therefore, manifestation thinking includes intuition and insight. Intuition is a human cognitive ability, referring to a perception, belief, or understanding that is produced directly without full logical reasoning. This is still a vague and uncertain understanding. Insight is a very clear and thorough understanding. Insight is a certain and clear understanding produced after logical reasoning or after transformation into clear concepts.

We can easily establish the no form integrated transformation between these three types of thinking.

(1) Motive force thinking transforming into manifestation thinking requires isolation thinking:

Description: For motive force thinking (reasoning process) to transform into manifestation thinking (understanding of reasoning results), clear and definite concepts (isolation thinking) are needed as a foundation.

Example: When conducting a mathematical proof, we need to use logical reasoning (motive force thinking) to derive conclusions, but to truly understand the proof process and conclusions, we need clear definitions and understanding of mathematical concepts (such as numbers, geometric shapes, functions, etc.) (isolation thinking).

(2) Motive force thinking transforming into isolation thinking requires manifestation thinking:

Description: For motive force thinking (reasoning process) to generate new concepts (isolation thinking), a deep understanding of existing concepts and reasoning processes (manifestation thinking) is needed.

Example: When learning a new scientific theory, we understand the content and logic of the theory through reading, thinking, and discussion (motive force thinking). A profound understanding of the theory (manifestation thinking) can help us form new concepts and incorporate them into our existing knowledge system (isolation thinking).

(3) Manifestation thinking transforming into isolation thinking requires motive force thinking:

Description: To transform intuitive understanding (manifestation thinking) into clear concepts (isolation thinking), logical reasoning, judgment, and analysis (motive force thinking) are needed for abstraction and generalization.

Example: When we observe different types of birds, we gain characteristics of their form, color, call, etc. (manifestation thinking), forming an intuitive understanding of bird characteristics (this is a vague concept of birds). To transform these characteristics into the concept of "bird" (isolation thinking), we need to extract their common features through comparative, analytical, and inductive reasoning processes (motive force thinking). By transforming the vague concept of birds into a clear concept of "bird", our manifestation thinking about the concept of birds also becomes clearer.

(4) Manifestation thinking transforming into motive force thinking requires isolation thinking:

Description: To transform intuitive understanding (manifestation thinking) into reasoning and argumentation (motive force thinking), clear concepts (isolation thinking) are needed as a foundation.

Example: We have a clear understanding of syllogisms. If we want to conduct reasoning, we need to have a clear distinction and understanding of the concepts used in the reasoning process.

(5) Isolation thinking transforming into motive force thinking requires manifestation thinking:

Description: To apply concepts (isolation thinking) to reasoning and argumentation (motive force thinking), a profound understanding of the meaning and application scenarios of the concepts (manifestation thinking) is needed.

Example: In legal debates, we need to use legal provisions and cases (isolation thinking) to construct arguments. However, to effectively use these concepts, we need a clear understanding of the meaning and scope of application of the legal provisions (manifestation thinking) in order to transform them into powerful arguments (motive force thinking).

(6) Isolation thinking transforming into manifestation thinking requires motive force thinking:

Description: To transform abstract concepts (isolation thinking) into concrete understanding (manifestation thinking), reasoning and associative thinking processes (motive force thinking) are needed to connect concepts with specific things and experiences.

Example: When learning the concept of "freedom", we might find it abstract and difficult to understand (isolation thinking). To truly understand the meaning of "freedom", we need to connect this concept with specific events and experiences through reading historical stories, reflecting on social phenomena, and contemplating personal experiences (motive force thinking), thereby forming a profound understanding of "freedom" (manifestation thinking).

The thinking discussed here is confined to the world of language, but thinking also exists in the worlds of sensation and emotion. The thinking in these three worlds is different.

How do we define the concept of "thinking"? We can see that it can be divided into three types of thinking, and we cannot consider any one of them in isolation. They are interdependent and indivisible. Therefore, it is impossible to comprehensively describe a complex concept like "thinking" using traditional (linear and static) definition methods. Thinking involves multiple interacting processes, and a single definition method can hardly encompass its entirety. Thus, a new way of defining this concept is needed.

This new way of defining is to divide concepts like "thinking" into three categories according to the three actions of no form. These three categories form a trinity of no form and can constitute a no form integrated transformation. Since the concept is divided into three categories, each category is a part of this concept. In other words, this definition method describes from within the concept. By applying this descriptive method of no form integrated transformation, we can comprehensively and dynamically understand this concept from within. We call this way of defining concepts "no form internal definition." This definition method provides a more precise and dynamic way of defining, which can better grasp the essence and function of concepts. The method of no form trinity and no form integrated transformation brings a new way of cognition: no form internal definition. Of course, there are also ways to describe concepts from the outside, which we will discuss later.

In the isolated world of language, the three types of thinking are concept-centered thinking. These three types of thinking involve producing clear concepts, establishing relationships between concepts and how to establish these relationships, using concepts to generate knowledge, using these concepts and knowledge to solve problems, and developing an understanding of concepts and their relationships. The function of language is to enable effective communication. Effective communication requires definitive expression. The certainty of these three types of thinking differs:

(1) Isolation thinking has the strongest certainty, as it demands the most thorough and clearest conceptual definiteness.

(2) Motive force thinking, particularly in reasoning, has less certainty. For example, inductive reasoning doesn't have as strong a certainty, and conclusions drawn from it may be localized.

(3) Manifestation thinking has even less certainty and can sometimes vary from person to person. This is because it may contain intuitive elements that have not undergone strict definition and logical reasoning.

After transforming the original intuition into definite isolation thinking through judgment, reasoning, and other motive force thinking processes, manifestation thinking also becomes clearer, turning into insight. In other words, if one wants to achieve the strongest certainty and clarity, it should be centered on the certainty and clarity of concepts. However, to obtain certainty, all three types of thinking are indispensable because they form a no form integrated transformation. Of course, concepts can also have vagueness and uncertainty, and we can use thinking to gradually clarify them. This occurs within the same process, whereas the transformation of intuition into insight is not part of the same process. This is because intuition is a process, and for intuition to become insight, it requires motive force thinking and isolation thinking, so this transformation occurs across different processes. Therefore, we can demand that isolation thinking have thorough and clearest conceptual certainty for concepts. However, we cannot demand the same for intuition (although we can improve the certainty of intuition).

Undoubtedly, philosophy, science, and religion all involve these three types of thinking, but the emphasis on these three types of thinking (in the linguistic world) differs across these domains. In science, reasoning-based motive force thinking and isolation thinking are prominent, while intuitive manifestation thinking is extremely compressed. This reduces the interference of subjective human judgment and relies on observed facts as the basis for testing scientific theories, thereby reducing errors in theory caused by biases in human subjective judgment. In religion, there's a strong emphasis on enhancing people's manifestation thinking and conceptual isolation thinking, forming the concept of God, and thereby receiving revelations from God or deities. Religion requires manifestation thinking to communicate with God or deities, and conceptual thinking to form an understanding of the divine. However, due to the relative weakness of motive force thinking in this domain (of course, there's certainly sensory and emotional thinking in religion, but here we're referring to motive force thinking in the linguistic world), the existence of God always lacks concrete proof. It can only be sustained through faith and experience.

In philosophy, these three types of thinking are more balanced. Therefore, in philosophy, one cannot rely solely on the motive force thinking of logical reasoning and the isolation thinking of concepts; manifestation thinking is equally important. Hence, for those studying philosophy, the requirements are quite high. In philosophy, most people don't focus on manifestation thinking. However, manifestation thinking is the root of establishing philosophical theories. Without relying on this type of thinking, philosophical theories cannot be developed. This is because philosophy studies metaphysics beyond general science, and its problems originate from the beginnings of general sciences. These beginnings are intuitive axioms that cannot be explained by the sciences themselves, and these intuitive axioms often don't belong to the category of that specific science. For example, in formal logic, formal logic itself cannot derive its three basic laws (law of identity, law of contradiction, and law of excluded middle); these three laws should be the objects of philosophical study. Philosophy mainly deals with such problems composed of intuition. Manifestation thinking is not only the source of establishing philosophical theories but also scientific theories. The establishment of scientific theories also requires our intuitive understanding of the essence and laws of things. However, scientific theories should use manifestation thinking minimally and most reliably, while manifestation thinking in philosophy is more universal. The objects of philosophical theory research are more abstract and universal. The goal of philosophy is to have the clearest and most thorough understanding of such objects. Therefore, philosophical theories have a higher degree of dependence on manifestation thinking.

Based on the above analysis of thinking in the fields of science, philosophy, and religion, we are essentially establishing the relationship between science, philosophy, and religion. Under the theory of no form trinity, it is because of the different emphases of these three types of thinking in different domains that different academic fields are formed. Although these three domains are vastly different, they are mutually complementary, interdependent, and mutually promoting (undeniably, there are conflicts between them, for example, the rational analysis of science is often incompatible with religious faith. However, this conflict does not mean there is no connection between them. On the contrary, it is precisely this conflict that prompts us to constantly think and reflect, thereby continuously improving our understanding). The different types of thinking emphasized in their respective domains determine the different orientations of their research objects.

Every domain studies objects in this world that require human investigation. In other words, it is impossible to have a comprehensive understanding of this world by relying on just one of these domains. Through in-depth study of these three domains, we can better understand this world.

The development of human history has confirmed this point:

1. When we have engaged in faith for a long time, our manifestation thinking is strengthened and trained. People then want to think about the world through philosophical reasoning. At the same time, the enhancement of manifestation thinking is also beneficial for contemplating philosophical questions.

2. When we have engaged in philosophical reasoning and conceptual thinking for a long time, people want to use scientific methods to verify objective reality in the world. Simultaneously, the strengthening of reasoning and conceptual thinking is also beneficial for scientific thinking.

3. When we have engaged in objective scientific thinking for a long time, we need to consider non-scientific matters such as the meaning, value, and origin of this world, thus needing to turn to philosophy or religion for intuitive understanding.

This cyclical process demonstrates the interconnectedness and complementary nature of these domains. Each domain, with its emphasis on different types of thinking, contributes to our overall understanding of the world:

(1) Religion nurtures our intuitive and spiritual understanding.

(2) Philosophy hones our ability to reason abstractly and question fundamental assumptions.

(3) Science provides methods for empirical verification and understanding of the physical world.

As we move through these domains, our thinking is enriched and our understanding deepens. This interplay between faith, philosophical inquiry, and scientific investigation has been a driving force in human intellectual and cultural development.

In the preceding content, three characteristics of no form actions were introduced: isolation has the characteristics of independence and distinction; motive force has the characteristics of change and generation; manifestation has the characteristics of intuition and identity. Now, let's explain this using the no form integrated transformation.

1)From the perspective of motive force, isolation is independence; from the perspective of manifestation, isolation is distinguishability; and from the perspective of isolation itself, isolation remains isolation. From the isolation perspective, isolation is both independent and distinguishable. For an object, independence means that changes in other objects do not affect it, and its changes are not influenced by other objects, meaning it and its changes are isolated. Independence implies not being affected by other objects. This is the independence that isolation possesses when viewed from the motive force perspective.

For an independent object to have distinguishability (or to distinguish an independent object), it needs to be isolated; for an independent object to have isolation (or to isolate an independent object), it needs to be distinguished; to distinguish an isolated object (or to isolate a distinguishable object) requires independence. This way, we can see that isolation, distinction, and independence form a no form integrated transformation. This demonstrates that independence and distinguishability are reasonable characteristics of isolation because they are mutually dependent and indivisible. Thus, we can say that these three concepts are interdependent, mutually transformative, and together constitute the complete concept of "isolation". This is how we invented a definition pattern for no form actions. This definition pattern is certainly not a circular definition. Because it is based on the no form integrated transformation, you cannot describe two of them while omitting the third. This is a method of understanding a concept from its exterior by applying the description method of no form integrated transformation. We call this conceptual definition pattern "no form external definition".

2) From the perspective of isolation, motive force is generation. From the perspective of manifestation, motive force possesses change, meaning that change is the manifestation of motive force (Heidegger expressed a similar view in "The Question Concerning the Thing": change is the mode of presence of force[1]). Of course, from the perspective of motive force itself, motive force remains motive force.

For an object to generate change (or for the generation of change in an object), motive force is needed; to make the generation of an object manifest motive force (or to generate an object through motive force), change is needed; in the process of change generating an object (or an object being generated while undergoing change), there must be motive force driving it. This way, we can see that motive force, change, and generation can undergo no form integrated transformation. This demonstrates that change and generation are reasonable characteristics of motive force because they are mutually dependent and indivisible, together constituting the complete concept of "motive force".

3)From the perspective of motive force, manifestation is intuition. From the perspective of isolation, manifestation is identity, and of course, from the perspective of manifestation itself, manifestation remains manifestation. From the perspective of manifestation, isolation should be the weakest and simplest. This manifestation-based isolation is the distinction and isolation of self from self, an undifferentiated isolation, which is the identity of self with self. To intuitively perceive identity is to intuitively perceive the self of an object, indicating that the object is identical to itself. Intuition means direct manifestation without the need to embody underlying causes and foundations. Manifestation can "simplify" isolation into identity, and motive force into intuition. Only this kind of simplification can achieve direct intuitive manifestation without embodying underlying causes and foundations. The action of manifestation acts like a filter, filtering out the complexities of isolation and motive force, leaving only the most essential information, allowing us to perceive and understand the world in a simple, direct way. This is why the action of manifestation plays a crucial role in the cognitive process. This also reflects what was said earlier: "from the perspective of manifestation, directly viewing form is essence," because what is manifested by no form is form.

To intuitively perceive the identical self of an object (or for the identical self of an object to be intuitively perceived) requires manifestation; to manifest, one must intuitively perceive the identical self of an object (or to intuitively perceive, one must manifest the identical self of an object); manifesting the identical self of an object (or for the identical self of an object to be manifested) requires intuition. This way, we can see that manifestation, intuition, and identity can undergo no form integrated transformation. This demonstrates that intuition and identity are reasonable characteristics of manifestation because they are mutually dependent and indivisible, together constituting the complete concept of "manifestation".

Here, a question arises: Why is the isolation characteristic of manifestation the identity of an object with itself? Why isn't it the intrinsic identity of no form? No form has no distinguishability, which is why it has this intrinsic identity, and consequently, this intrinsic identity cannot be manifested. Because there is no distinguishability, to manifest this intrinsic identity, isolation is necessary. Therefore, we say that the identity of self with self is the manifestation of the intrinsic identity of no form. This both embodies the intrinsic identity of no form (because it is the identity of self with self) and possesses distinguishability (because "self" is already an isolated concept). This is the relationship between the intrinsic identity of no form and the identity of self with self. This also demonstrates that the identity of self with self is reasonable as the isolation characteristic of manifestation.

In Kant's philosophy, intuiting a unified object from diverse materials is a process of unifying into identity. Only objects with identity can be manifested. The characteristic of identity as isolation in manifestation allows us to manifest a single object with independent distinction. Intuition enables us to generate independent objects in manifestation. Intuition is direct manifestation, without any indirectness or concealment.

Isolation has the characteristics of independence and distinction, which not only indicates that isolation, independence, and distinction can undergo no form integrated transformation, but also shows that they form a trinity of no form actions. They are combined inseparably. Similarly, motive force, change, and generation also form a trinity of no form actions. Likewise, manifestation, intuition, and identity form a trinity of no form actions. Note that, as mentioned earlier, knowledge, intuition, and thinking also undergo no form integrated transformation. This intuition tends towards intuiting content. The meaning of "intuition" varies slightly depending on the context.

References

[1] Heidegger. The Question Concerning the Thing, translated by Zhao Weiguo, Shanghai Translation Publishing House, 2010, p. 208.