If you find it difficult to stick to something, start with its minimum standards and then just keep doing it, ignoring what is slow, rotten, ugly, and pulling...... They are nothing compared to "doing".
- Kun Peng's theory
Volume VII, Chapter 17 (II)
Original:
And how did these things, the masonry, become a house?
Clearly, we're looking for why.
In the abstract, to ask is to ask what it is,
Some things, like a house or a bed, are purpose-to-be, and some are the prime mover;
The prime mover is also a reason.
Interpretation:
Furthermore, why do these things, such as masonry, become a house?
Clearly, we're looking for why.
In the abstract, to ask is to ask what it is (essence),
For something, such as a house or a bed, how they are (essentially) is the purpose,
For other things, how (essence) is the primordial mover (the first mover, the first mover).
The original movers (the first movers, the first movers) are also a cause.
Original:
In the case of birth and destruction, what is sought should be the motive;
As for the problems that exist in things, we should seek the cause of it.
Interpretation:
However, in the case of generation and destruction, the motive should be sought;
And when it comes to the problems that exist in things, what is sought should be the cause.
Original:
Where one word cannot be clearly used as an explanation of another word, the object of inquiry is often not settled (e.g. when we ask what a person is),
Because we don't have a definitive analysis of certain elements in a whole.
Interpretation:
When one term cannot be clearly stated by another term, the object of the question is often not answered, for example, when we ask what a person is,
Because we don't have a precise analysis of certain elements in a whole.
In other words, this is just a simple statement, and there is no limit to which ones are.
Original:
Before we can ask questions, we must reveal our destiny;
If not, the inquiry is merely groping the border between the presence and absence of this thing.
Interpretation:
Before we ask questions, we must reveal our destiny and have a clear division.
Otherwise, the question is merely hovering on the edge of whether there is such a thing.
Original:
For we must have affirmed the existence of something from something that is known,
That's why a question is raised, and something definite should be raised;
For example, "why do these materials become houses";
Because these materials have the house of how it is.
Interpretation:
For we must have affirmed the existence of something from something that is known,
That's why this question is asked, and it should be something definite;
For example: "Why can these materials be built into houses";
Because these materials have the house,
In other words, the essence of the house is presented in these materials.
Original:
"How can this individual, or this body, become human in this form?"
Interpretation:
"Why does such an individual, or this body, become a human being when it has such a form?"
Original:
So what we are looking for is the cause, the form of the cause, because of the form, the matter becomes something definite;
And that's the nature of things.
Interpretation:
Therefore, it is the cause, that is, the formal cause, that we are looking for, so that the material can become something definite;
And that's the substance of things.
Original:
Clearly, then, all words cannot be asked, nor can they be answered;
We should look for another way to inquire about such things.
Interpretation:
Obviously, then, all words are unquestionable and unanswerable;
We have to look for these kinds of things in other ways of asking questions.
Original:
For the whole of which is united from certain things, since it is one, ought to be like a whole syllable, and not like a bunch of letters, which are different from letters,
Interpretation:
For the whole, which is made up of the union of certain things, since it is one, should be like a complete syllable, and not like a bunch of letters, which are different from letters.
Original:
Unlike β and α, the muscles are not fire and earth, (because when they are separated, the whole such as muscles and syllables cease to exist, while letters do, fire and earth also exist; ）
Interpretation:
Unlike b and a, muscles are not fire and earth (because when they are separated, the whole as muscles and syllables cease to exist, while letters and fire and earth do);
Original:
So syllables are not just two letters of a vowel and a consonant, but become another thing.
Interpretation:
Therefore, syllables are not just two letters of a vowel and a consonant and become another thing.
Original:
Muscles are not just fire and earth, or heat and cold, but have become something else:
Interpretation:
Muscles are not just fire and earth, or heat and cold, but become another thing:
Original:
— If, then, the other thing which is synthesized must itself be an element or be made up of elements,
Interpretation:
— If, then, this other thing which is synthesized should be an element in itself or made of elements,
Original:
(a) if the same argument is an element in itself, it will still apply;
The muscles will be made up of this other thing and fire and earth, and the argument will continue to be extended until the end of the process.
Interpretation:
(a) if it is an element per se, the same statement applies;
The muscles will be made up by this other thing and the earth of fire, and the process will continue to give rise to this statement, and the process will go on endlessly.
Original:
(2) If this is a synthesis, it is evident that it must synthesize more than one thing (and if it is one, the synthesis can only be combined with one thing), and we may apply the same argument in both muscle and syllable.
Interpretation:
(2) If it is a compound, it is evident that it is not only one thing (and if it is one, then the synthesis can only be this thing and itself), as we can refer to in the case of muscles and syllables.
Original:
But this "other thing" is very different from the original thing, it is not an "element" but a "cause".
It is the cause that makes "this" a muscle and "that" a syllable;
The other cases are similar.
Interpretation:
But this "other thing" must be different from the original, and this is not the element but the cause,
It is the reason that makes "this" a muscle and "that" a syllable;
Other examples are similar.
Original:
These are the essence of every thing, because this is the basic reason why things become what they are.
Interpretation:
These are the entities of every thing, because this is the basic reason why things become what they are.
Original:
Again, though some things are not ontologies, many ontologies are formed by natural processes by their nature,
Thus these ontologies are almost of such a nature that they are not an element but a principle.
Interpretation:
Furthermore, although some things are not entities, most entities are formed by nature by natural processes.
Thus this type of entity is close to such a property, which is not an element but a principle.
Original:
An element exists as matter in a thing, and if it is analyzed, it is reduced to an element;
For example α and β are elements of syllables.
Interpretation:
An element exists as a material embodied in a thing, and this thing is an element if it is to be dissected;
For example, a and b are elements of syllables.
This article was originally written by "Kun Peng Theory" and is not reprinted without permission
Please pay attention to this headline, Kun Peng has been established since the end of 2015, the founders are Feng Lipeng, Teng Dapeng, including today's headlines, Xueqiu, Sohu, NetEase, Sina and many other well-known websites or self-media platforms of special experts or special columnists, has published more than 6,000 original articles and Q&A, the article has been reprinted more than 800 times, and the total number of articles read is nearly 2 billion.