Reaching AA from three angles

Reaching AA from Three Angles: Reality, Cognition, and Cognitive Tools

(An Instancological Account of Absolute Convergence)

Introduction

Instancology does not approach the Absolutely Absolute (AA) by speculation, belief, or abstraction. AA is not constructed by thought, nor inferred by logic, nor postulated by metaphysics. AA is reached—but only when three independent yet structurally matched angles converge:

Reality — the Objectively Absolute, as one quadrant of the 2×2 ontological matrix

Cognition — the Subjectively Absolute, the absolute form of mind

Cognitive Tools — Absolute WuXing, the non-relative mode of knowing

Each angle is individually insufficient. Together, they form a necessary and sufficient condition for reaching AA. This triple convergence is not optional; it is structurally required.

I. The Reality Angle: AA as the Objectively Absolute

From the perspective of reality itself, AA is not a highest being, first cause, or ultimate substance. It is the Objectively Absolute—that which:

Is not located in time or space

Is not representable by symbols or language

Does not participate in causality

Does not admit internal differentiation

In the Instancological 2×2 matrix, reality is exhaustively structured by Absolute vs. Relative and Objective vs. Subjective. AA occupies the Objectively Absolute quadrant, distinguished not by content but by ontological status.

AA is not something that exists among others; it is the unspeakable background that issues all instances without itself becoming an instance. Every law, form, structure, and world belongs downstream from AA, but AA itself is upstream of all articulation.

Thus, from the reality angle:

AA is not known as an object; it is reached as the termination of objecthood.

This immediately explains why AA cannot be discovered empirically, modeled mathematically, or deduced logically. These all belong to Relative domains (AR or RR). The reality-angle alone, however, does not yet explain how AA can be reached by a mind.

II. The Cognition Angle: The Subjectively Absolute

The second angle is cognition, but not cognition as psychology, neuroscience, or information processing. Those belong to the Relative. Instancology distinguishes a higher level: the Subjectively Absolute.

The Subjectively Absolute is not a stronger intellect or more powerful reasoning capacity. It is the absolute form of subjectivity itself, characterized by:

Non-dependence on representation

Non-reliance on inference or proof

Non-sequential apprehension

Direct alignment with structure rather than content

Crucially, Instancology asserts:

The truth is of the Objectively Absolute, and the mind is of the Subjectively Absolute.

Two Absolutes are equal.

This equality is not metaphorical. It is structural.

Because truth itself belongs to the Objectively Absolute, it cannot be grasped by a merely relative mind. But when cognition reaches the Subjectively Absolute, the structural asymmetry disappears. Cognition and truth now share the same ontological level—Absolute.

This is why cognition is possible at all at the highest level:

Cognition succeeds not because the mind mirrors reality,

but because Absolute cognition is structurally commensurate with Absolute truth.

Without the Subjectively Absolute, AA would remain forever inaccessible even if it exists. With it, the possibility of reaching AA is opened—but not yet realized. A further condition is required.

III. The Cognitive Tools Angle: Absolute WuXing

Even an Absolute subject cannot reach AA using Relative tools.

Sensory experience is Relative

Rationality and logic are Relative

Language is Relative

Mathematics is Relative

These tools operate within AR or RR and therefore terminate before AA. Instancology therefore introduces a decisive distinction: WuXing (悟性).

Relative WuXing (RW)

Insight operating within structure

Still mediated by meaning

Still reliant on distinctions

Absolute WuXing (AW)

Non-representational

Non-linguistic

Non-inferential

Non-dual

Absolute WuXing is not intuition in the psychological sense, nor mysticism, nor emotion. It is a structural cognitive mode that operates where:

Meaning has not yet arisen

Language has no purchase

Subject–object division collapses

AW is the only cognitive tool capable of operating at the Absolute level. Without it, even the Subjectively Absolute mind would still lack a mode of access.

Thus:

Absolute WuXing is the bridge that does not bridge—

because at the Absolute level, there is no gap to cross.

IV. Why All Three Angles Are Necessary

Instancology rejects any single-angle shortcut to AA:

Reality alone gives an ineffable Absolute, but no access

Cognition alone risks idealism or self-projection

Cognitive tools alone collapse into mysticism or technique

Only when all three align does AA become reachable:

Angle

Absolute Form

Role

Reality

Objectively Absolute

What AA is

Cognition

Subjectively Absolute

Who can reach

Tools

Absolute WuXing

How reaching occurs

This is not a synthesis but a structural convergence. No angle reduces to another. None can substitute for the others.

V. Culmination at AA: Not Knowledge, Not Meaning, Not Being

Reaching AA is not:

Acquiring a proposition

Discovering a new entity

Producing a theory

Achieving mystical union

AA is pre-meaning, not meaningless. It is pre-being, not non-being. It is pre-truth, not falsehood.

Language and meaning belong to the Relative. To speak of AA requires borrowing meta-language and meta-meaning, but these do not constitute AA itself.

Thus, Instancology concludes:

AA is reached only when

Objectively Absolute reality,

Subjectively Absolute cognition, and

Absolute WuXing

converge—

and even then, AA is not possessed, only stood before.

Conclusion

Instancology does not claim that AA is easy to reach. It claims something more radical:

AA is reachable only in one way—and that way is structurally unavoidable.

Reality provides the Absolute ground.

Cognition provides the Absolute subject.

Absolute WuXing provides the Absolute mode.

Remove any one, and AA vanishes—not because it ceases to exist, but because access collapses.

This is why Instancology does not extend philosophy indefinitely.

It completes it—by identifying the exact conditions under which the Absolute can be reached, and beyond which philosophy itself must fall silent.