Instancology: The Final Philosophy — A New Foundation of Truth, Being, and Knowledge

Abstract

This thesis introduces *Instancology* (範例哲學), a new metaphysical system developed by Dong Yawei, to a Western philosophical audience. It presents a comprehensive ontological framework that transcends and completes the historical arc of Western metaphysics. Through the distinction of four fundamental relationships of existence—Absolute Absolute (AA), Relatively Absolute (RA), Absolute Relative (AR), and Relative Relative (RR)—Instancology offers a paradigm-based understanding of truth, being, and cognition. It also introduces a novel epistemological mode called *WuXing* (悟性), which moves beyond empirical and rational faculties. By situating key Western thinkers within the Instancological framework, this work proposes that philosophy reaches its final clarity through the instance-based structure of reality.

1. Introduction: The End of Philosophy as the Beginning of the Whole

Philosophy in the West has long sought the foundation of reality, cycling through notions of substance, spirit, being, and difference. From Parmenides' unity to Kant's conditions of possibility, from Hegel's dialectics to Heidegger's Being, the trajectory has always pointed toward a final ground. Yet, these projects remained entangled in partial perspectives. *Instancology* contends that philosophy has now reached its terminus not in exhaustion, but in arrival: the whole can be seen, not through parts, but through the paradigm of the *instance*.

The purpose of this thesis is to introduce Instancology as a new philosophical system that completes the search for metaphysical ground by reordering the categories of existence and redefining the pathway to truth. This reordering is not a return to first principles in the traditional sense, but a reconstitution of the entire ontological architecture. It frames all that exists in relation to four fundamental modes: AA, RA, AR, and RR. Through this structure, Instancology resolves the persistent gaps in epistemology, logic, and ontology that Western philosophy has long wrestled with.

2. The Fourfold Framework: AA, RA, AR, RR

At the heart of Instancology is the recognition that all phenomena exist as *instances* in relation to fundamental modes of reality. The framework distinguishes four ontological dimensions:

- AA (Absolute Absolute): The unspeakable background of all being; not an object or concept, but the unconditional ground from which all relations arise.

- RA (Relatively Absolute): The domain of law, logic, and form—structure without representation.

- AR (Absolute Relative): The realm of nature and natural instances, which obey law but exist independently of human constructs.

- RR (Relative Relative): The realm of human products, including language, symbols, technology, and institutions.

This schema allows us to classify all instances of reality precisely, and more importantly, to understand their relational origin. Crucially, *RA is not derived from RR*, meaning that logic cannot ground itself; paradoxes such as Russell’s and Gödel’s stem from this mistaken reversal. By making RA foundational, Instancology avoids self-referential traps.

Moreover, this framework clarifies that philosophy's long aim at the "Absolute" (e.g., Hegel’s Geist, Heidegger’s Being) was in fact an approach to AA—but always mediated through RR or AR. Only by affirming AA as unspeakable and grounding can the rest fall into place.

3. The Primacy of the Whole: Paradigm Over Parts

Western science and philosophy often attempt to understand wholes through analysis of parts. Yet, Instancology insists that the *whole precedes parts*. This is not merely a logical claim, but an ontological one: the instance as a whole cannot be derived through aggregation.

In this light, artificial intelligence cannot become conscious, no matter how advanced, because consciousness is not emergent from parts, but an instance grounded in AR with unique access to AA. Similarly, evolution understood through Instancology is not a blind aggregation of mutations, but a patterned unfolding of natural instances.

Thus, *paradigms* (範例) are not generalities or types, but wholes that instantiate relationships among AA, RA, AR, and RR. To know something is to recognize its paradigm, not to infer its parts.

4. WuXing: A New Mode of Knowing

Instancology introduces a third epistemological faculty alongside empirical perception and rational deduction: *WuXing* (悟性), sometimes translated as "intuitive grasp" or "eureka insight." WuXing is not mysticism, but a cognitive recognition of paradigm as a whole. It corresponds to the moment of breakthrough in science or philosophy—when the whole becomes clear instantly.

Kant attempted to distinguish pure reason from understanding; Heidegger differentiated calculative and meditative thinking. But WuXing names a concrete, ontological faculty grounded in the relationship between human instance (AR) and AA. Only through WuXing can RA be directly accessed without mediation by RR.

This reframes the entire project of epistemology. Truth is not constructed (as relativism holds) nor deduced (as rationalism holds), but recognized through paradigm.

5. Truth, Logic, and Paradox: The Instancological Resolution

One of the major crises of 20th-century Western philosophy arose from logic's collapse under its own weight: Russell’s paradox, Gödel’s incompleteness, and the failure of formal systems to ground themselves. These are not just technical puzzles but signs of RR attempting to ground RA.

Instancology resolves this by assigning RA a non-representational status. Logic is not a product of human thought, but a mode of relationship that belongs to the structure of existence itself. RR (language, mathematics, computation) merely represents aspects of RA; it cannot define or ground it.

AA, as the source of all instances, is not accessible through language or logic—thus not subject to paradox. The recognition of this limit is the beginning of metaphysical clarity.

6. The Human Instance and the Question of AI

Human beings are unique in their AR positioning: they are natural instances with the ability to access AA through WuXing. This is why only humans can produce philosophy, religion, and meaning.

AI, by contrast, belongs to RR. It cannot achieve consciousness or truth, because its origin is human representation. It may simulate reasoning or learning, but it can never instantiate WuXing. The fear of AI overtaking humanity is thus misplaced; the true concern is in its misuse, not its essence.

Instancology draws this line clearly. Intelligence is not the key distinction; access to paradigm is.

7. Conclusion: Philosophy as the Path to AA

The history of philosophy, from the Presocratics to Heidegger, has been a progressive clearing of the way to the Absolute. Instancology offers the last step: not a final system of thought, but the recognition that the Whole—as instance—is the ultimate ground.

Philosophy ends not in nihilism, but in clarity. The unspeakable AA, the lawful RA, the given AR, and the constructed RR together form the structure of all that is. To see them in relation is to reach the end of metaphysics—and the beginning of wisdom.