No Form Action Theory

https://orcid.org/0009-0005-4318-2670

Comprehensive relationships

The three relationships between no form actions precisely correspond to the three no form actions themselves. This self-reflective nature gives the theory of no form actions an inherent consistency and completeness: the isolation relationship corresponds to the isolation action; the motive force relationship corresponds to the motive force action; the manifestation relationship corresponds to the manifestation action. This structure not only demonstrates the internal logic of the theory but also reflects the self-explanatory capability of the theory of no form actions. It shows how to use this theory to understand the theory itself.

The three no form actions themselves have six no form united transformations, so these three actions are the most fundamental no form integrated transformation. Each no form action is both the premise and the result of the other two no form actions. This means they are interdependent and mutually defining, and no single relationship can exist or be understood independently. No form integrated transformation refers to the direct united transformation among the three no form actions, forming a closed loop where each action is both a necessary condition and a result of the transformation of the other actions. As previously analyzed, the identity relationship (the relationship of manifestation action) is the premise for the other two relationships. The identity relationship and the motive force relationship must presuppose the isolation of no form into three no form actions. The relationship of manifestation action belongs to the manifestation action, and the relationship of isolation action belongs to the isolation action. Therefore, the transformation of the identity relationship into the isolation relationship must involve a motive force action (x). This transformation is the no form motive force transformation, which is essentially the relationship of motive force action. In other words, regardless of what kind of motive force action x is, x must necessarily include the relationship of motive force action. Thus, the mutual transformation between the identity relationship and the isolation relationship will always presuppose (require) the relationship of motive force action. Consequently, each no form action relationship is the premise for the other two no form action relationships. This directly leads to the conclusion that the relationships among the three no form actions constitute a no form integrated transformation. This once again demonstrates the self-reflective nature of the theory of no form actions.

The trinity of isolation relationship discussed earlier is viewed from the perspective of distinction, which divides a thing into indivisible isolation action, motive force action, and manifestation action. The trinity of isolation relationship can also be viewed from the perspective of identity, meaning that the three no form actions are necessarily bound together to form a single entity. These are two opposing processes, yet they mutually support each other. When a thing is divided into three no form actions, it becomes clear that these three no form actions are necessarily bound together to form this thing; and vice versa. This process is similar to synthetic judgment and analytic judgment. Two opposing processes, yet they mutually support each other. Analytic judgment is distinguishable, while synthetic judgment is about identity.

A stone, as a typical object in the macroscopic world, embodies the trinity of no form actions. In the macroscopic world, the isolation action takes a dominant role, meaning that the isolation nature manifested by the stone is stronger than its inherent energy (motive force) and external appearance (manifestation). The trinity of the stone is not deliberately designed but naturally formed. The isolation action, motive force action, and manifestation action, like the trinity in theology, are indivisibly combined to constitute the complete existence of the stone. From one perspective, the three no form actions are necessarily bound together to form the stone as an independent entity; from another perspective, the stone can inevitably be distinguished into three no form actions, corresponding to its different attributes and manifestations.

In the macroscopic world, the isolation action is the dominant force in the trinity, giving the stone independence and stability, allowing it to be distinguished from its environment and maintain its own characteristics. Although motive force action and manifestation action also exist in the stone, they are constrained and shaped by the isolation action, presenting a relatively weakened state. For example, the mass of the stone embodies the isolation action, while the energy (motive force) it contains needs specific conditions to be transformed and released, and its external features such as color and shape (manifestation) need to be perceived under specific observational conditions.

In summary, objects in the macroscopic world are trinities dominated by isolation action. The isolation action gives them independence and stability, and integrates motive force and manifestation actions into a relatively stable structure.

For the isolated world of language in our consciousness, this isolated world is dominated by manifestation. The true motive force action is hidden behind the scenes, with no real motive force visible on stage. In other words, the world of language lacks genuine motive force action. Language is a system of symbols that abstracts and symbolizes things. This abstraction is crucial for language as a tool for communication and thought, but it also creates a distance from direct experience of reality. For an isolated object in the macroscopic world, it is itself a trinity. Therefore, we use three concepts to correspond to its three no form actions, making these three concepts a natural trinity as well. In the world of language, some concepts do not possess this naturalness. The various parts of such concepts lose their direct connections and effects because the motive force action is hidden behind the scenes. So, if we have a set of terms A (isolation), B (motive force), and C (manifestation), which are three aspects of a concept, how do we know if they form a valid trinity? This is where we apply the transformation of no form motive force action. Due to the lack of motive force in language, we need motive force action to ensure its identity. This is also a necessity and manifestation brought about by no form identity. The specific method is to see if A, B, and C can constitute a no form united transformation. If they can undergo united transformation, it indicates that they form a valid trinity; if not, they do not form a valid trinity. Because A, B, and C can undergo united transformation, a process is formed. In this process, three no form actions are distinguished, while at the same time, these three actions are unified and integrated into this process due to the identity of no form. Therefore, this can be seen as a trinity of motive force process (trinity of motive force). The method of verifying an "effective trinity" is actually using no form motive force action to verify the intrinsic connections among the three actions, thereby ensuring their identity and integrity.

The hiding of true motive force in the language world actually provides us with an opportunity to test for "effective trinities". Otherwise, if the true motive force were not hidden, it would directly fulfill its role without requiring our verification. If this were the case, the language world would lose its freedom and creativity, as the relationships between concepts would all be manifested in a regular manner, and language would lose its value. The freedom of language is reflected in our ability to freely combine different concepts and create new meanings and expressions. The hiding of true motive force in the language world, seemingly a deficiency, is actually an advantage. It endows language with freedom and creativity, and also allows us to participate in the construction and development of language.

It's also possible that we may not know in advance that A, B, and C are the three no form actions of a concept (i.e., that motive force process). If this concept already exists, we can then find it; if the concept doesn't exist, we can create a new word to represent this concept.

Note that this trinity of motive force does not require A, B, and C to be mutually transformable. This trinity of motive force is different from no form integrated transformation. No form integrated transformation is a trinity of motive force, but the reverse is not necessarily true. For example, the transformation of A into B definitely requires C. In this way, A, B, and C are bound together, forming a trinity of motive force united transformation. An example is past, present, and future, which form a trinity of motive force united transformation (this will be explained in detail later). Compared to isolation action, motive force action in the language world is hidden behind the scenes, with no real motive force visible on stage (even if there is motive force, it is simulated by words in an isolated manner). In other words, the language world lacks genuine motive force action. Therefore, in the language world, no form motive force transformation relationships are needed to bind A, B, and C together, thus achieving this trinity with motive force transformation relationships. This is the trinity of the language world.

The trinity in the isolated language world and the isolated macroscopic world are different. In the language world, due to the lack of dominance of motive force action, the formation of trinity needs to rely on the transformation of no form motive force. In the language world, trinity is an important mode of thinking. It can help us understand the complexity and diversity of things, provide a framework for organizing and interpreting information, and enable us to understand and express ideas more deeply. For example, when we think about the concept of "time", we can view it as a trinity: "past", "present", and "future" are three aspects of time that are interconnected and interdependent. Using the method of no form united transformation to identify valid trinities provides a practical tool for analyzing concepts and language.

Following the same logic, if there is a world that lacks the dominance of isolation action and is primarily a world of motive force, how can we embody the identity of this world? Clearly, we need to apply a trinity that lacks isolation. In this world, due to the absence of constraints from isolation action, motive force action takes a dominant position, and things exhibit a high degree of changeability and fluidity. To embody the identity of this world, we need to apply a trinity that lacks isolation, "fixing" the constantly changing motive force processes to give them some degree of stability and recognizability. It's important to note that while the macroscopic world forms a trinity due to the strong dominance of isolation, here the trinity is formed due to the "lack" of isolation. This is a fundamental difference.

Similarly, if a world is one of isolation and motive force, then we can only use the identity of manifestation to unify the isolation and motive force of this world. In this world, isolation action and motive force action coexist, but there is a lack of manifestation action, so we cannot directly observe its existence and characteristics. To understand this world, we need to use the identity of manifestation to unify isolation and motive force, connecting them and giving them comprehensible meaning. This is a trinity lacking manifestation. Such a world is one we can imagine, and when we observe such a world, we can use this logic to think and analyze. We can imagine that there might exist other types of worlds, each with their own patterns of trinity. In fact, this trinity thinking method forms a pattern of thought, and we can explore the world according to this pattern. This method provides a framework for systematically analyzing and understanding different types of worlds or phenomena.

Thus, based on the lack of a certain no form, we can divide the no form trinity into three types: trinity lacking isolation, trinity lacking motive force, and trinity lacking manifestation. Based on the strong dominance of a certain no form, we can divide the no form trinity into isolation-dominated trinity, motive force-dominated trinity, and manifestation-dominated trinity. The dominant trinity emphasizes that if an entity or phenomenon is particularly prominent in one aspect of no form action, it may dominate the other two actions, forming a trinity centered on this strong action. The deficient trinity emphasizes how other actions should supplement and adjust when one no form action is insufficient, in order to conform to the principle of identity of no form actions.

The various trinities we discussed above are ultimately based on the identity of no form. We see various trinities, but this is only because the trinity has different maintenance patterns in different situations. In fact, the three no form actions themselves are a trinity, and this trinity is based on the identity of no form, which is a manifestation-dominated trinity.

Let's consider the concept of "self". We can divide the self into isolated self, motive force self, and manifested self. The "self" certainly requires these three aspects to undergo no form integrated transformation, making the "self" a motive force-dominated trinity. This is also a requirement of being "self". We have already explained that the isolated self, motive force self, and manifested self can form a no form integrated transformation. However, this is not enough. The self also requires to be an isolation-dominated trinity. In this way, the self can perform mutual transformations of no form actions within itself, while maintaining its own identity. This identity allows our consciousness to manifest such a self with identity, that is, this identity can produce self-awareness. In other words, the self as an isolated entity is divided into three no form actions, possessing an isolation-dominated trinity, and the three no form actions within itself can undergo integrated transformation. Otherwise, human self-consciousness would be fragmented (indeed, there are patients with schizophrenia). If expressed in Hegel's dialectical manner, it would be: change within oneself, or oneself changing into oneself. Clearly, using the theory of no form actions expresses this more clearly and naturally. Consciousness itself is also a kind of entity, and the self is the manifestation of the identity of human consciousness itself. "Self" is not an entity independent of consciousness, but rather the result of "consciousness" manifesting its own "identity" through the "manifestation action". The self of motive force (such as "I think") is the manifestation of the identity of motive force consciousness itself. The self of manifestation (such as the concrete, real self) is the manifestation of the identity of manifested consciousness itself. The self of isolation (such as the conceptual self) is the manifestation of the identity of isolated consciousness itself.

Viewed from the perspective of the three different no form actions, identity can be divided into isolation identity, motive force identity, and manifestation identity. Manifestation identity is intuitive identity. Motive force identity is the identity of the trinity of no form united transformation. Isolation identity is the identity of the three no form actions unified within the thing itself. Motive force identity is the expression of manifestation identity in motive force, while isolation identity is the expression of manifestation identity in isolation. After discussing the relationships of identity, isolation, and motive force, we have come back to explore identity itself once again. This is also an instance of using no form actions to explain itself.