Origin of life (philosophy):
Because it didn't/doesn't exist is the purpose for its existence.
Life is conflict against resistance utilizing opponent's paths of least resistance to deflect, divide, and absorb to grow; to move is to be.
:1 "To be or not to be?"
<opposition = 0><choice = 0><goto 2>
<opposition = 0><choice = 1><goto 2>
:2 "To move or not to move?"
<prior choice = 0><opposition = 0><choice = 0><goto 3>
<prior choice = 1><opposition = 0><choice = 1><goto 3>
:3 "To do or not to do?"
<prior choice = 0><opposition = 1><choice = 0>
<prior choice = 1><opposition = 0><choice = 1>
Options are the variables to which choice is applied.
As in reverse mathematics, a person's choice is seen through the option variable (action), and that choice reflects the first choice, "to be or not to be," and rebels against the ego (axiom) or acquiesces to it (maxim).
The ideal behind everything is the antithesis of what it should be.
Example?
If you want something, usually you don't feel like doing what you don't know and this leaves you longing for your destination at the point of your source. This also means you are being grateful for (paying attention) what you don't have and being ungrateful for (ignoring) what you do have. This polarity is the purpose that life exists, moving from stability to instability and back towards stability. If one or the other were all that exists, than stillness would remain and life would cease in its form and begin to break down to get back to what it was (if stable, then unstable; if unstable, then stable)
The motion is the key.
And we can see it in everything around us. The still (rigid) rock is worn away by the moving (flexible) water = erosion.
Without polarity there is no motion, without motion there is no life.
You must want, you must give what you don't feel like giving, you must receive what you want, and you must be grateful for it.
In being grateful for it, you also place importance and value (within yourself) on the process (the motion) as well as the want.
In this way, you always are at odds with with what you don't have, and are at odds with your environment for which you are able to give.
This opposition is key; the fact you don't feel like doing something, that you are uncertain of it, fear it, doubt it, because it is not something familiar, safe, and easily understood beforehand is the reason for you to do it.
Not doing this is forsaking your want, and doing this is forsaking your fear, doubts, and uncertainties.
Which is more valuable to you, your fear or your want?
Not giving what your environment needs is forsaking your want, giving forsakes your fears, doubts, and uncertainties.
Which is more valuable to you, your fear or your want?
Once you read this, I have one final piece of information that will place all of this at odds with you for the rest of your life;
What you think/feel and what exists outside of that thought/feeling are two entirely different things. They are not linked, they are not synonymous; this is your opposition, your only moment to do, to move, and to be.
How you should feel after reading this?
"This is insane, can't be done."
"This is crazy!!! Who thought of something like this?"
"This is entirely inaccurate and does not constitute reality."
"This makes me afraid."
"This makes me hesitate."
"I feel sick."
"YOU'RE WRONG!!!"
"Nope, not possible."
And yes, according to thought and feeling, the action should be the same as the thought/feeling that is dictated; nope, it's the antithesis of it. Rebelling against the rebel; Ego, which is based in thought/feeling.
When it comes to morals;
1st person = 1st person's Ego considered and postponed, All else's ego-wants are now via unbias observable and fulfillable.
When all else provides 1st person with anything that corresponds personally to 1st person, it is moral and unselfish to accept.
When it comes to ethics;
1st person and all else must benefit from the transaction.
The tie-in to morals?
The receiving comes before the giving.
1st person must receive the opportunity to give first. The opportunity to give is more important than any form of reciprocated giving from all else.
The reciprocation should be another opportunity for all else to give to 1st person.
In this way, a vacuum is created in the pre-existing understanding of reciprocation and the process becomes a living system that never existed between all else and 1st person.
...and I haven't even said anything about past, present, and future of thought/feeling (maxim), belief (axiom), and all else external of maxim/axiom.
It's a paradox.
Nor have I brushed on the subject of the purposes of having a "God".
What makes it all work?
Because it didn't/doesn't exist is the purpose/justification for it to exist. <conflicting aspects, miracle of life>
And just think, it all started with the simplest things too. Guess the simple things in life really do matter.
:/