|
The druid said: “2 Hates 1” On the Procedural Logic
of Difference and the Necessity of Antagonism A study in Finn’s Procedure Monism, by Bodhangkur 1. Introduction: From Arithmetic to Ontology At first glance,
the druidic aphorism “2 hates 1” appears childish, perhaps whimsical —
as though belonging to the playful arithmetic of the forest rather than to
metaphysics. Yet within the context of Finn’s Procedure Monism, the
phrase compresses an entire ontological system into four words. The minim
articulates the structural tension that makes the cognizable world possible:
the antagonism between oneness and multiplicity, sameness and difference,
truth and the lie. Its force lies not in metaphor but in procedural
necessity: every emergent because differential reality owes its existence
to a refusal of sameness, meaning oneness. The world exists
because two hates one. 2. The Procedural Ground: The One as Universal
Procedure Finn’s Procedure Monism posits
that all identifiable realities are differential iterations of a single universal
process — the Universal Procedure (UP). The UP is not an object,
substance, or being; it is the set of constraints (rules, forces,
logics) that enable raw randomness to self-organise into structured,
self-identifying events. In this
view, what ancient metaphysics called Brahman, Substance, or Being
is here understood as a universal algorithm whose “output” is
identifiable realness. Every photon, bacterium, or human is a locally
instantiated algorithmic event — a quantised, self-bounded, hence
self-defined, identifiable performance of the UP. Hence: The One
is procedural, not personal. And every
emergent — every “thing” — is a local iteration of the procedure, a
transient, self-identifying copy of that universal pattern. 3. Emergence and the Birth of Two To emerge
is to differ. 1 →
2 = the act of distinction. This
primal act — the division of the continuous same into the discrete, hence
quantized differential — is the origin of the cognizable world. In the
absence of difference, nothing stands out; no identity can be known, no
boundary drawn. Difference and quantization are therefore the sine qua non
of manifestation. Within
Finn’s discontinuous ontology, every identifiable real requires a
discontinuity — a “gap” — from which realness arises. “Two” differentials (of
the One) are the first discontinuity, the first lie, the first
necessary denial of unity and oneness. 4. The Lie of Difference From the standpoint
of the Finn’s UP, difference is a functional deception. The emergent
must claim: I am not that. It must pretend independence in
order to sustain its local integrity. This
claim, though false in the absolute sense (since all are iterations of the
same procedure), is true functionally — it allows survival within the
domain of the emerged. Hence, Finn’s paradoxical corollary: The lie creates the world. Dualism —
the division into self and other, mind and body, creator and creature — is
not error but survival strategy. Truth, in the monist sense of pure
unity, would annihilate difference and terminate emergence altogether. Therefore: ·
To live is to lie. ·
To survive, one must sustain difference. ·
Hence, 2 hates 1. 5. Hate as Procedural Affect “Hate,”
in this formulation, is not moral or emotional but procedural affect —
the energetic resistance that maintains the boundary between emergents. Every
emergent is defined by what it excludes. The boundary that distinguishes
“this” from “that” is sustained by repulsion, by rejection, by dissent. “Hate”
thus denotes the anti-merger impulse necessary for survival. Hence the
logic: 2 hates 1
because 1 is death to 2. 6. Exempla of the Law Across Scales
In every
domain, the derivative (as mature adult) resists its origin, save in
religious or academic cults. 7. The Dualist Imperative: Why Two Must Eliminate One In the emerged
world — that is, the domain of living, dynamic, bounded systems — every
structure’s survival depends on maintaining the lie of difference. The
monist, by denying this lie, threatens collapse. From the
dualist’s standpoint, the monist is not wrong — merely lethal. His
truth unravels the field of distinctions upon which survival depends. Thus,
procedurally, and to survive, the dualist must eliminate the monist. History
confirms this necessity: ·
Socrates, crucified by the polis; ·
Jesus, executed by priests of dualist doctrine; ·
Spinoza, excommunicated by the guardians of
difference; ·
Giordano Bruno, burned for collapsing heaven and
earth into one continuum. Each re-enacts the law of 2
hating 1. 8. The Monist’s Response: Understanding the Hatred The
mature monist — Finn’s “mature, because decided adult” — no longer interprets
hate as bad or as tragedy. He sees it as procedural feedback: the
emotional coloration of difference-maintenance. To him,
hate is not bad but a good artefact of differential quantisation. In
realising this, the monist ceases to hate back. He recognises that the lie
and the truth are both iterations of the same procedure — one necessary for
emergence, the other for final completion. Thus, in
Finn’s cosmology, the monist does not proselytise; he completes his iteration
silently. He lives as an assistant of the UP, knowing that all “hating” is
merely the noise of the system maintaining local identity. 9. The Procedural Rhythm: From Difference to
Dissolution From the
perspective of the Universal Procedure, the cycle is perfect: 1. Unity
(procedural baseline) gives rise to 2. Difference (emergence
via antagonism), which eventually leads to 3. Completion
(de-mergence into sameness). Emergence
thus oscillates between the poles of difference and sameness — dualism and
monism — producing the world as periodic interference pattern. Creation
is the lie of difference; The
hatred of 2 toward 1, though tragic locally, is functional universally: it
sustains the dynamism of adaptive becoming. 10. Conclusion: The Druidic Wisdom The
druid’s aphorism “2 hates 1” is therefore not a cynical observation
but a law of existence. 1. Procedurally, “hate”
denotes resistance — the force that maintains boundaries and hence identity. 2. Ontologically, it names
the necessary tension between the perfect unity of the UP, the ONE, and the
seemingly imperfection of its n local iterations. 3. Psychologically
and socially, it describes the inevitable conflict between the seer
of truth and the maintainers of the world as lie. In Finn’s
monism, the hatred of 2 for 1 is neither moral failure nor cosmic tragedy but
the heartbeat of creation itself. The world
lives by lying. Heraclitus ( “War is the father of all and king of all;
some he shows as gods, others as men; some he makes slaves, others free.” In Finn’s terms,
one could almost retranslate Heraclitus’ dictum as: “Difference is the father of all things.” Epilogue: The Druid’s Minim Codex Entry 2 hates 1 — Finn,
the Diagnostic Iteration S |
