Higher Tiers Explanation

Understanding the Tiering System, especially one as complex as this one can indeed be challenging. A clear and comprehensible explanation is crucial to avoid misconceptions.

High 1-T and High 1-T+

High 1-T

This movement of indeterminacy is known as "Spirit," representing pure being. It's a relatively unconditioned process, as its essence, nature, and existence are rooted in its true ground, the Absolute. However, it is also conditioned, as it reflects and sublates itself. Spirit, as essence, is an undifferentiated unity of being and non-being, yet it reflects on its own identity, which gives it determinateness and makes it dependent on both itself and the Absolute.

Ground is the immediate, while the grounded is the mediated. Ground, as positing reflection, makes itself into a posited state and presupposes reflection. In doing so, it refers back to itself as something sublated—an immediate through which it is mediated. This mediation, moving from the immediate to the ground, is not an external reflection, but the ground’s own self-reflecting action. In this process, the ground connects through self-identity while also externalizing itself. The immediate ground refers to its essential presupposition, which is condition, meaning that real ground is essentially conditioned by the otherness within itself.

Continuing this idea, while the movement is not conditioned due to its immediate nature rooted in unreflected ground, the moment when a ground is realized as unconditioned creates a ground-connection. This leads to a self-referential reflection, which in turn creates a condition—essentially, itself. This results in an infinite series of conditioned grounds.

In the process of condition, essence releases the unity of its internal reflection, but it does so as an immediacy, which now takes on the character of a conditioning presupposition. This presupposition forms only one aspect of the whole. Therefore, the conditions are the complete content of the fact, as they are the unconditioned in the form of formless being. The ground, returning into itself, establishes this sphere as the first immediacy, referring to it as the unconditioned. This immediacy, as sublated reflection, becomes reflection within the realm of being, forming itself into a whole. Form, as determinateness of being, proliferates, appearing as a distinct manifold separate from the determinations of reflection, with content indifferent to it.

Thus, the two aspects of the whole—condition and ground—are both indifferent and unconditioned in relation to each other.

This infinite series of conditioned grounds grows progressively deeper with each step because reaching the unconditioned requires an infinite progression through increasingly less conditioned stages. However, this progression only leads to the totality of all grounds, which, as a whole, is still just a sum rather than an unreflected unity. This is akin to the reflection principle: The universe V is absolutely infinite, transcending all infinities, and while each stage (including large cardinals) brings one closer, the sum of all infinities remains ultimately knowable, not ineffable. Thus, the totality of all conditions is both an end and a beginning but not a true unity. This parallels the distinction between the First Act and Pure Act, where the former has potentiality and the latter does not.

Conditioned existence occurs in time, and to achieve a philosophy of the unconditioned, one must move beyond time-based existence. There are two possible approaches: either one attempts to conceive of a first moment of time beyond which there is existence without duration or succession, or one views time as an unlimited duration containing an infinite series of successive antecedents and consequents. In the latter, each part is conditioned, yet together they form an unconditioned whole.

However, this concept of an infinite regress of time or a series of dependent existences in time brings inherent contradictions. The idea of an unconditioned whole, made up of infinite parts, contradicts itself, as these parts can never be completed. Even if one abandons the notion of the Whole and the Unconditioned and focuses instead on an infinite succession of conditioned existences, conditioned by nothing beyond themselves, the concept falls apart. This is because to conceive such a succession, one must add moment to moment endlessly, requiring an eternity for its realization.

The Absolute - High 1-T+

In Hegelian philosophy, the Absolute is understood as a contradictory unity of both negation and affirmation of all predicates. This refers to the dissolution of all qualities and modes of being into indeterminacy (negation) and the affirmation of all qualities and distinctions within it (position), as it encompasses every essence and determinateness, which means any form of existence.

The simple, solid identity of the Absolute is indeterminate because every determinateness of essence, existence, and being dissolves into it. As a result, determining what the Absolute is seems to involve negation, presenting the Absolute as the negation of all predicates, or as a void. Yet, since it must also be seen as the affirmation of all predicates, it takes on the form of a contradiction. If this negation and affirmation are viewed as external reflections, what results is an unsystematic dialectic, easily showcasing both the finitude of determinations and the idea of the Absolute as the totality of all determinations. However, this external reflection fails to raise the positions and negations to a true unity.

There are two aspects of this indeterminacy: one in relation to itself and conditioned otherness, and one without relation, being completely unchanged and unconditioned.

Focusing on the unconditioned aspect, it is crucial to note that the Absolute ground is neither Being nor essence, meaning it is not only unprocessed but also completely unmoving and unchanging. It cannot be confined to either the outer or inner totality because these imply determinateness. The Absolute cannot merely be the sum of conditioned grounds or their relations. The former suggests connectivity and reflection (sublation), and the latter fails to meet the definition of the unconditioned.

The Absolute is not simply being, nor is it merely essence. Being represents unreflected immediacy, while essence represents reflected immediacy. Both are totalities, but determinate ones. Being manifests in essence as concrete existence, and the relation between being and essence evolves into the connection of inner and outer. The inner represents essence as a totality connected to being, and the outer represents being as connected to reflection. However, the Absolute is the unity of both; it constitutes the foundation of the essential relation, which, as mere relation, must eventually return to its identity, a ground that is not yet fully realized.

This quote aligns with the interpretation that the Absolute, as a contradictory unity, is both negative and positive in its exposition. Initially, the movement seems only to negate its own act within the Absolute. It transcends the manifold differences, determinations, and their movements, becoming a "beyond" that exists behind the Absolute. This is the negative exposition of the Absolute. The true form of this exposition is the logical progression of the spheres of being and essence, not something brought in from outside or imposed by external reflection. Rather, it is an internal process, driven by necessity, in which being becomes and essence reflects, ultimately returning to the Absolute as its ground.

In this process, reflection and determination relate back to the Absolute as the sum of all, which is called "relatively unconditioned" due to the indeterminacy of totality. The negative exposition dissolves distinctions into the Absolute, while the positive exposition represents the reflective "shine" of the Absolute. However, this positive exposition is still just a reflection, not the true substance of the Absolute, which remains beyond mere exposition. Any determinations that appear are nullities gathered externally and used to create starting points for further activity, but these determinations do not originate in the Absolute. Instead, they end in it, reinforcing the notion that the Absolute is the final ground of all processes.

The Absolute possesses Absolute identity, meaning anything similar to the Absolute—such as essence, being, existence, or the whole—exists as isolated totalities. This is because the unconditioned, by definition, cannot possess determinacy. Yet Absolute identity is not the Absolute itself but an attribute of it. This distinction emphasizes that while the Absolute can reflect itself through various determinations, it remains untouched and unmoved by them, always existing as the ultimate ground and unconditioned totality.

The identity of the Absolute is called "absolute identity" because each of its parts, or each determinateness, embodies the totality of the whole. Determinateness becomes transparent, appearing as mere reflective shine, where the differences dissolve into their own positedness. Reflected determinations—such as essence, existence, the world, parts, whole, and force—may seem to exist independently, but they ultimately collapse into the Absolute, which serves as their grounding reality. The Absolute, now in a state of pure self-identity, does not determine itself because determination involves a difference in form, which is already negated. However, since the Absolute contains every difference and form, the distinction of content must also emerge within it. Yet, this content is sublated within the Absolute's identity, which integrates all manifoldness, both of the world-in-itself and the phenomenal world.

The Absolute, understood as absolute identity, is thus "absolute" in a determined guise, meaning it exists in opposition to the manifold, yet it is also the negation of reflection and determination. This Absolute, in its achieved state, is not merely an incomplete exposition of itself but is itself the result of an indeterminacy process that returns to absolute identity, albeit abstract and indeterminate. Therefore, if one asks about the mode of the Absolute, it is simply actuality—neither unreflected nor reflected, neither positive nor negative—but a unity and expression of pure, unmoved simplicity.

When one seeks the content of this exposition, the answer is that the distinction between form and content within the Absolute has been dissolved. The Absolute manifests itself through this very process, and its content is the fact that it is self-manifesting. The Absolute, as absolute form, becomes identical with itself in its own division, a negative that returns to itself. This process of self-rejoining is what constitutes absolute self-identity, which remains indifferent to distinctions. As a result, the content of the Absolute is nothing other than the exposition itself—this self-sustaining movement. The Absolute, in its pure expression, manifests itself not as an inner truth or in opposition to something external, but purely as its own actuality, self-revealing for its own sake.

THE FORMS:

The intellect, or nous, exists outside the soul and serves as the ground of being before the originary One. Its divine unity is second only to the One itself. All things arise from and exemplify the intelligible, which is perfect, unchangeable, and eternal. When the soul is purified, it becomes form—entirely incorporeal, intellectual, and divine. In this purified state, the soul is the source of beauty and related to all things that share kinship with it. When the soul ascends to intellect, it becomes more beautiful, as intellect and the products of intellect constitute the soul’s true beauty. These aspects are not alien to the soul, but intrinsic to its nature when it is truly itself.

Goodness and beauty for the soul, then, are realized through "assimilation to God," because beauty is found in the intelligible realm, where the rest of beings reside. Beings themselves are identical with beauty, while ugliness represents the other nature—primary evil. For God, goodness and beauty are identical, and the Good is synonymous with Beauty.

This reinforces the idea of the nous as an originary unity that precedes being, while containing all forms beyond the duality of subject and object. These forms, being of the intellect, are perfect, unchangeable, and beyond the constraints of space and time. They are not subject to corruption, distinctions, or determinations. The forms are a trace of the One and possess generative power, both internally and externally. The unity of these forms is the intellect itself, which is generative and ontologically perfect, unconditioned, and not subject to lower causes, whether actual or potential.

In this framework, intellection is of that which is internal to Nous (Intellect), meaning the Forms are internal to it. The Form is the Idea itself, and thus, Intellect and the intellectual substance are one. Each Idea is not distinct from Intellect but is part of it, with Intellect being wholly composed of all the Forms, and each Form in turn being identical with Intellect. This mirrors how the totality of scientific knowledge contains all theorems, each integral to the whole without being differentiated by place.

Intellect exists within itself, in stillness, always complete and full. If one were to suggest that Intellect is prior to Being, then one might conclude that Intellect, in its actuality and thought, generates and perfects Being. However, if Being is understood as prior to Intellect, the Beings reside within the thinking Intellect, while intellection is an addition to them. Similar to how fire's actuality is part of its essence, intellection is the actuality of the Beings. Ultimately, Being and Intellect are one and share a singular actuality. The distinction between the two is only apparent to us, divided by our understanding, while in reality, the undivided Intellect is also Being and encompasses all things.

Higher Forms such as Goodness and Beauty are reflected onto lower forms like fashion, taste, and justice (although justice itself is a higher form in terms of its nomological nature). Lower forms reflect higher forms in varying degrees of complexity to simplicity, similar to how materials reflect sunlight with differing clarity. Despite these differences in reflection, all forms are essentially the same in their core essence. The Forms are eternal and unchanging, representing emanations from the One. The various hypostases (such as Intellect and Soul) do not occur as temporal events but instead signify degrees of emanation from the One, where the closeness or directness of the emanation determines their reflective power.

Emanationism, Nigh-0 and 0

Armstrong's interpretation of The One as described by Plotinus and later clarified by Pseudo-Dionysius focuses on the metaphysical necessity of attributing characteristics, such as will and creation, to the First Cause. By doing so, he essentially turns The One into an ousia (substance), allowing it to be subject to logical distinctions and predications. According to Armstrong, this move is required for The One to be understood as the First Cause within a metaphysical framework. He ascribes various attributes to The One such as "lover, love, loved, eternal, creator, creative process, and eternally created," implying that it has an active and relational nature within its metaphysical role.

However, this interpretation introduces a misunderstanding in regard to the radical transcendence of The One as envisioned by both Plotinus and Pseudo-Dionysius. The key misunderstanding lies in treating The One as something that can be predicated, or even subjected to attributes like will or creative process. Armstrong overlooks the fact that The One, as posited by Plotinus and emphasized by Pseudo-Dionysius, is beyond all being, beyond ousia, and thus cannot be approached with the same categories or logical distinctions we use for beings.

Pseudo-Dionysius, in particular, insists that The One transcends both affirmation and negation. It is neither "one" in the way we understand the term, nor can we deny it certain characteristics as if it existed within the realm of intelligible distinctions. To speak of The One as possessing will, creative process, or relational characteristics, as Armstrong suggests, imposes a level of determinacy and limitation that contradicts its absolute transcendence.

In contrast, Plotinus emphasizes that The One is not a being among beings, but the source of all being. It is utterly beyond any distinctions of intellect, will, or creative process. The moment we ascribe these characteristics to The One, we reduce it from its transcendent nature and mistakenly bring it into the realm of conditioned existence, which it fundamentally surpasses. As Pseudo-Dionysius states, The One is beyond every assertion and denial because it is "free of every limitation, beyond every limitation."

Thus, Armstrong's treatment of The One as a metaphysical being with certain attributes misapprehends the core philosophical idea that The One remains ineffable, unconditioned, and beyond even the distinction between being and non-being. It can only be approached through negation, or apophatic theology, which denies the applicability of any characteristics, including those Armstrong attributes to it. Plotinus, in this passage, delves into the complex relationship between The One and the multiplicity of beings. The One is the principle of all things, not by being identical with them, but by containing all things in an undistinguished and indivisible unity. This leads to the concept of emanation, where the multiplicity we experience arises at the second level of existence—nous or intellect—where distinctions and rational forms of being are introduced.

To answer how The One can be the principle of all things without being identical to them, Plotinus emphasizes the transcendence of The One. It does not possess distinctions in itself but causes them to arise on a secondary level. While The One contains all, this containment is not multiplicity in the sense of division but a form of non-differentiated potentiality. The distinctions, or rational forms, arise only when beings emanate from The One and exist on a lower level of reality.

Moreover, Plotinus makes it clear that if The One were separate or "other" from being, it would lose its transcendence, becoming just another entity among many. To maintain its absolute transcendence, The One must be simple and beyond all being, yet omnipresent. This paradoxical condition means that while The One is present to all beings, it is not identical to any of them. It is not bound by the relational limitations of beings within the realm of multiplicity, which maintains its status as transcendent and infinite.

By maintaining that The One is beyond both being and non-being, Plotinus avoids the pitfalls of reducing The One to just another part of the cosmos. He stresses that all generated things must originate from a simpler principle, and this simplicity must go beyond even the simplest forms of multiplicity or division. The One, therefore, is "outside all multiplicity and any simplicity whatsoever," meaning that it is the ultimate source, fundamentally different from the beings it brings into existence, even while it is the cause of their existence.

Plotinus presents The One as the principle of all things, bringing all into existence through a process of emanation. The One contains all things in an undistinguished manner, meaning the multiplicity that arises later in existence is not present within The One itself. Distinctions, as Plotinus explains, only occur on the second level of reality, the level of nous or intellect, where the rational form of being comes into play.

Plotinus emphasizes that as beings move downward toward multiplicity, they become more fragmented and distant from the original source. Conversely, moving upwards represents a return to the simplicity and unity of The One. This is why The One is beyond all multiplicity and simplicity—because it is the absolute source from which all things emanate without being divided itself.

In his model, Plotinus describes three main hypostases: The One, Nous (intellect), and Psyche (soul). The One is the first and highest hypostasis, the ultimate source and cause of all things. It is identified with The Good, and this Good is something that intellect relies on, but it itself is not reliant on intellect. Instead, intellect (nous) is a reflection or trace of The Good—emanating from it but of a lesser nature. The One as the creative force exceeds being, categories, and all predicates. It is not subject to the distinctions of positive and negative predicates, such as "one" or "oneness," because these distinctions belong to the realm of multiplicity, which The One transcends.

Plotinus stresses that while The One is the source of everything, it is not identical to the things that emanate from it. The emanated forms—intellect, soul, and all other beings—are not The One, but they are reflections of it. Thus, even though all things come from The One, they are not equivalent to it. This is the essence of Plotinus' doctrine of emanationism, where everything flows from The One, yet The One remains undivided, transcendent, and beyond all forms of existence or non-existence.

Emanationism necessitates that Tier 0 entities are inherently undifferentiated and unconditioned, meaning they are independent of any other existence and not bound by lower levels of potential or actuality.

"...but it [the One] is without need, sufficient unto itself, lacking nothing, the measure and bound of all things, imparting from itself intellect, real being, soul, life, and intellectual activity." (I.8.2, 5)

The pre-intellect (sometimes referred to as the form of the good or the inchoate intellect) arises from the exteriority or external aspect of the One, which is itself a result of the interiority of the One. This essence overflows, leading to the formation of a lower essence, which ultimately manifests as the intellect. The intellect, in turn, is a trace of the form of the One. This stage represents the boundary between High 1-T+ and Tier 0, where complete undifferentiatedness is present, second only to the One in terms of nominal aspects. This suffices for a comprehensive emanation-based ontology.

This is considered the first act of generation: the One, being perfect and in need of nothing, overflows, and its superabundance creates something distinct from itself. This creation turns back toward the One, becomes filled, and, by gazing upon the One, transforms into Intellect. The act of halting and turning towards the One constitutes being, and the gaze itself becomes Intellect. Intellect, in its likeness to the One, emanates power in the same way the One did. This emanation, springing from the substance of Intellect, is Soul, which comes into being as Intellect remains unchanged, just as Intellect arose while the One stayed immutable. (V.2.1, 7–18)

A fitting metaphor for this is the sun (the One) and its rays (the external aspect), which cause effects. Although we use causal or temporal language to describe this process, the actual emanation is outside of time and thought, but this is the only way we can express it.

In Plotinus' emanationism, the external act or effect is entirely dependent on the internal act, while the internal act remains unaffected by the external. The One emanates passively, and its external act—a reflection of its internal activity—exists in constant motion yet remains within the realm of atemporality. The external effect is a consequence of the internal act, but the internal act itself is unchanging and distinct from the external manifestation.

Plotinus explains this relationship through the analogy of fire:

"In each and every thing there is an activity which belongs to substance and one which goes out from substance; and that which belongs to substance is the active actuality which is each particular thing, and the other activity derives from that first one, and must in everything be a consequence of it, different from the thing itself: as in fire there is a heat which is the content of its substance, and another which comes into being from that primary heat when fire exercises the activity which is native to its substance in abiding unchanged as fire." (V.2.2, 21–37)

This points to a distinction between the internal act (the essence of the thing) and the external act (the effect or consequence of that essence). The sun serves as another analogy: the sun itself remains unchanged at its center, but it emanates light, which extends everywhere without ever being separated from the sun:

"The sun, too, is an example since it is like a centre in relation to the light which comes from it and depends on it; for the light is everywhere with it and is not cut off from it; even if you want to cut it off on the one side, the light remains with the sun." (I.7.1, 27)

In this model, the external act can be compared to a mirror image: the image does not change the thing it reflects, and it cannot exist separately from its source. The internal act, like the object in the mirror, remains unaffected and unchanged by the external:

"Just as the image of something, like the weaker light, if cut off from that which it is, would no longer exist, and in general one cannot cut off and make exist separately anything at all which derives its existence from something else and is its image, these powers also which came from that first could not exist cut off from it." (VI.4.9, 36–40)

This emphasizes the inseparability of the external from the internal act, where the internal remains unchanged and omnipresent, while the external merely reflects its essence.

In Plotinus' system of emanationism, the distinction between the internal and external acts is crucial. The internal act is entirely self-contained, whereas the external act is directed outward, emerging naturally as a consequence of the internal act. Plotinus emphasizes this in his description of the internal act of Intellect, which rests in itself and directs its activity inward, while still generating an external effect. He explains:

"Peace and quiet for Intellect is not going out of Intellect, but the peace and quiet of Intellect is an activity taking its rest from other activities... For it had to be first in itself, then also directed to something else, or with something else coming from it made like itself, just as in the case of fire it is because it is previously fire in itself, and has the activity of fire that it is able to produce a trace of itself in another." (V.3.7, 13–25)

The internal act (the One) is independent of its external manifestation (Intellect). However, as Emilsson argues, the external act naturally follows the internal one, not as two separate actions but as a "double activity"—the external act occurring inherently due to the internal act. The process is not sequential but simultaneous, where the internal act remains unchanged while emanating the external one.

Plotinus continues to explain how Intellect comes into being from the One:

"When, therefore, the Intelligible abides ‘in its own proper way of life’, that which comes into being does come into being from it, but from it as it abides unchanged... what comes into being does so as thinking; and since it is thinking and thinks that from which it came... it becomes Intellect... a representation and image of it." (V.4.2, 27–39)

In this model, the external act is not a second, separate event but an inherent result of the internal act's perfection. Plotinus compares this to fire producing heat: fire remains unchanged in its nature, yet its external heat is generated naturally from its essence.

However, when external activity is specifically directed outside the self-contained nature of Intellect, it gives rise to a new stage—Soul. Plotinus explains:

"For when it [Intellect] is active in itself, the products of its activity are the other intellects, but when it acts outside itself, the result is Soul." (VI.2.22, 26–29)

Thus, while the internal and external acts are distinct, they are also interconnected. The internal act of Intellect is inward-directed and self-contained, while the external act (emanation of Soul) is outward-directed, arising as a natural consequence of the internal act. Plotinus uses the term "double activity" to express how the external act inherently follows from the internal:

"The intelligible could not be the last, for it had to have a double activity, one in itself and one directed to something else." (II.9.8, 20–25)

This reflects Plotinus' vision of a seamless chain of emanation, where each higher reality remains unchanged yet generates a lower reality through its inherent power.

Emanationism (Motion and Atemporality):

In Plotinus' emanationism, the concept of motion and atemporality is described through what he calls a "double act," which is viewed as a single, continuous movement but with two different descriptions. This dual description reflects how the same act can be understood in two ways: the internal act, which is complete and timeless, and the external act, which operates in relation to temporality and causality.

Plotinus aligns this duality with Aristotelian causation. The internal act is an absolute, self-contained activity, freed from the constraints of any external goal or telos. It does not require any further completion because it is always in a state of completeness. This activity is atemporal—outside time and instantaneously fulfilled without the need for any progression. In contrast, the external act engages in causality but remains linked to the timeless nature of the internal act.

Plotinus illustrates this point:

"But if someone were to say that movement was an incomplete active actuality, nothing would prevent us from giving active actuality the priority and subordinating movement to it as a species as being incomplete, making its category active actuality, but adding the 'incomplete'... For certainly the man who is in motion has already moved, and the man who is cutting, cut already. And just as what is called active actuality does not need time, so neither does movement." (VI.1.16, 1–6,9,15–17)

Here, Plotinus emphasizes that even though external movement may seem incomplete, it is already a complete actuality in itself. He draws a distinction between external movement, which appears to be ongoing, and internal movement, which has already been fulfilled. The internal act—like walking or cutting—is already finished from the outset.

In essence, movement is defined as the transition from potentiality to actuality, with Plotinus emphasizing that the potentiality for an act (e.g., walking or sculpting) is not something to be completed over time, but rather, the act itself is the motion. Thus, he writes:

"Let us grant that movement, to describe it sketchily, is the passage from potentiality to that which it is said to be the potentiality for... and when one progresses to a statue, its progress is movement, and when the other is engaged in walking, the walking itself is movement." (VI.3.22, 9–12)

In this view, even though movement involves a transition from potentiality to actuality, it remains grounded in the internal, timeless completeness of the act. The external manifestation is merely a reflection of the internal, absolute motion that is already fulfilled. This captures the way in which Plotinus' emanationism conceptualizes both motion and atemporality as intrinsic to the nature of the One and its emanations.

In any version of emanationism, based on Plotinus’ framework, certain core principles must be present to align with his metaphysical model:

I. The Internal Act is Self-Contained and Does Not Intend the External Act

The internal act, representing the One or the highest principle, is completely self-contained. It does not intentionally cause or direct itself toward an external effect. The One, in its perfect state, overflows naturally without any intention or necessity, and this overflow produces lower hypostases, like Intellect. This means the external act (emanation) is an inevitable consequence of the One’s self-sufficiency, not something actively pursued.

II. The External and Internal Acts Are Both Simultaneous and Atemporal

The internal and external acts are not separate events in time; they happen instantaneously and beyond time (atemporally). While the One remains unchanged, the external act, or emanation, occurs as a continuous reality, without progression in time. The external act exists at the same time as the internal one, and both are part of a singular movement, as Plotinus describes.

---

Traces (Emanationism)

The concept of "traces" refers to the external act of the hypostases, which leaves a reflection of the higher reality (the One) in lower realms. For example, Intellect contains a "trace" of the One's power, reflecting its essence but without diminishing or affecting the One itself. The trace is the external aspect of the hypostases, and it indicates the generative power of the One, which emanates without undergoing any change.

Plotinus illustrates this process of emanation through the analogy of sunlight radiating from the sun:

"It must be a radiation from it while it remains unchanged, like the bright light from the sun which, so to speak, runs round it, springing from it continually while it remains unchanged." (V.1.6, 28–33)

The trace signifies the continuous flow from the One, where lower beings receive their form and essence without the One itself undergoing any alteration. As with fire producing heat, the external act (emanation) is a necessary consequence of the internal substance.

In summary, any consistent version of emanationism should involve:

1. Self-contained internal action: The One does not intend the external but emanates naturally.
2. Simultaneous and atemporal external/internal acts: Both exist at once, beyond time.
3. Traces: The external act is a reflection or trace of the internal, as lower hypostases reflect the higher.

Aperion

…but if one differentiates the intelligibles from the Good, they would describe the realm of Forms as intelligible beauty, while the Good stands beyond this, as the "spring and origin" of beauty. Alternatively, they may equate the Good with primal beauty, yet beauty undeniably resides in the intelligible realm. (I.6.9, 37–40)

The Good is suggested to transcend beauty, not only in terms of perfection and undifferentiated nature, but also as a more direct emanation from the One. In other words, Intellect and the ground of being (the source of beauty or the form of beauty) are subordinate to the Good (the ultimate object of desire) in generative power, which originates from and resides within the One. A brief definition of "low-apeiron" could be that its generative unity surpasses and precedes the ontological perfection of High 1-T+, serving as the participative ground; while ineffable and undifferentiated, it is not to the degree of semiotic referents or names. Nonetheless, it is beyond being, as the very ground of being exists within such a foundation.

Beauty is considered secondary because the passion for it is felt by those already aware... The Good itself does not need beauty, though beauty requires the Good. (V.5.12, 19, 34) Thus, the Good surpasses the Beautiful, though both participate in the One. However, the Good consistently precedes Beauty even more fundamentally. Ultimately, both are still within the One.

The confusion arises from the fact that both the Good and the Beautiful participate in the same source, but the One precedes them. Even in the higher world, the Good itself does not need beauty, though beauty needs the Good. (V.5.12, 31)

There are also passages that speak of absolute Beauty as primary, such as in Enneads VI.7:

For love here is without limit, just as the beloved is boundless; thus, the love for this beauty would be unbounded, and the One’s beauty is of a different nature, beauty beyond beauty. If it were nothing, what beauty could it possess? But if it is lovable, it must be the source of beauty. Therefore, the creative power of all things is the bloom of beauty, a beauty that generates beauty. (VI.7.32, 29)

Summary

Plotinus describes The One as a perfect and unchanging creative force, from which all things emanate without it moving, willing, or acting in any way. The Intellect, for example, comes into being like the light that radiates from the sun while the sun itself remains unchanged. The further one is from The One, the weaker the light or reflection of its essence becomes, following the principle that everything derives from The One yet cannot exist separately from it.

This idea parallels the reflection principle in set theory, where certain properties of a set reflect onto subsets within it. Similarly, in the metaphysical realm, all properties and beings reflect aspects of The One but are not The One itself. The closer one is to The One, the more unified and powerful the reflection; the further, the more fragmented and weak the emanation becomes.

In this system, naming or categorizing The One is impossible, as it transcends all intelligible or definable concepts. It is beyond all truths, propositions, or anything that can be predicated or negated. It is the ground of being but also prior and transcendent to all being, remaining ineffable and beyond intellectual comprehension.

The One - Apeiron

The Good - Boundary between High 1-T+ and Tier 0

The Beauty or Intellect/Being - H1T+