Pink Floyd, Money
Delving deeper into the Non-Well-Founded Identity Principle that I proposed earlier, here is an illustration which applies the principle to money – US dollars specifically.
What I intend to show is that a dollar is defined by the integral which spans a continuum from the most literal (a dollar “simply is” one hundred cents) to the most figurative. The most figurative end of the continuum is another continuum – an orthogonal continuum which contains the entire top level continuum from what is meant literally as one hundred cents to every other meaning, association, context and contingency, from every perspective, throughout eternity.
This stack of figurative extensions can yield many loose morphological analogs – electron shell type morphology, stepped pyramid, color wheel mandalas, etc. The closest figures to associate with the dollar would be other kinds of currencies: Euros, Deutschmarks, Yen, etc. These are all of the things which are like dollars, but not dollars, and which dollars can actually buy. The associations radiate out from there to include references to any transaction with dollars. Ultimately this would stretch to encompass any real or imagined transaction which has ever occurred, every transaction which could occur, or could not occur…until the set includes the entire contents of eternity (aka, the Absolute Inertial Frame, or the Totality*).
Once you recover from that (seriously, come back later…I have already had one person say they got a headache thinking about this), then have a look at the diagram below. Same thing, only from the Absolute perspective. Borrowing from the Dark Side of The Moon Prism, I attempt to show how the cosmos is the continuum of self-individuating, nested, Ouroboran Monism. Rather than the Blue Sky icon representing the Totality, it represents any individual thing as a generic presence.
In the top diagram, I show how the individuality of a dollar implies the figuratively nested Totality, and in this diagram, it is the Totality which is considered the individual identity which is spread across the continuum of its own absolutely individuated cardinality or literal granularity.
Another point to make about the continuum is that the bottom limits of the integrals represent both that which is common to each and every unity. The cents which ‘make up’ a dollar represent the quantitative definition which describes any particular dollar, and therefore all dollars. The top end of the integrals represent the opposite definitions – that which is increasingly unique to a particular event in time or associated with a unique group of less particular experiences (qualia, concepts).
You’re welcome 😉