Questions · Comparison & Structure Tests
Even if a philosophy says “the highest concept must also be let go,” might it still retain a person who must “see the truth”?
Direct answer
Yes, it might. This is exactly why “concept withdrawal” and “cognitive-mediation withdrawal” must be checked separately. A system can say “do not even cling to the concept of truth,” yet still keep the function of “being aware of it, attaining it, recognizing it” to the end. If, after deleting this final seer, the entire end point can no longer stand, then the cognitive mediation is in fact still part of the structure.
Further explanation
The place where Zai-Sheng Thought itself deserves to be tested is the same: it cannot be exempted from examination merely because it claims to have “no observer.” One must return to the text and see whether “being” and “becoming” still stand after the function of “correctly knowing the root” is deleted. Its own claim is that they still stand, because the happening does not wait for a knower's approval.
Core concepts
Primary sources
Conclusions that must not be drawn
This is a structural test, not a scoring of philosophies as higher or lower.
Related phrasings
After letting go of the highest concept, does a witness still remain?Does a philosophy still need a realizer in the end?Who is knowing the truth?
Natural phrasings of the same semantic domain, used for retrieval and understanding; the page does not pile up near-duplicate content.