Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
Which implies using your choice to agree or disagree with the choice of another. Doing that binds FREE will of choice, hence putting ones choice into bondage to a chosen ones suggestion.
saved some trouble
One doesn't need to be saved...few tempt each one within to seek salvation.
a meeting place that has moved on.
Notice that to meet during motion implies being set apart before being able to meet. This setting apart aka the internal differentiation of motion into matter...one can only discern for self as partial matter within whole motion.
If you choose to agree or disagree with that statement, then you established yet another meeting place, hence yet another contradiction of being ONE.
Can there be "true" without a dualistic conflict against "false"?
Yes! Or there could have been at least, but that's a moot point and my answer is still yes.
Yet your answer rebranded "true vs false" into "yes vs no"...a dualistic conflict chosen by oneself. A self inflicted contradiction of self.
Question and answer implies suggestion and consent...giving consent to any suggestion establishes a dualistic conflict of reason. It puts ONEs consent together with another ONEs suggestion, hence 1+1=2. That's math-o-magic...a trick.
Moot/mod - "to meet; assemble"... https://www.etymonline.com/word/moot
Nature disassembles sentences (life) by setting each one apart from one another, before point of death assembles each partial back into whole.
The points we (pluralism) suggest each other are tempting consenting ones (singular) together...hence making ones sentence/sentire - "sense" moot.
Indeed my point is to rebrand choice into yes or no, discernment can and could've saved some trouble, but that's a meeting place that has moved on.
Which implies using your choice to agree or disagree with the choice of another. Doing that binds FREE will of choice, hence putting ones choice into bondage to a chosen ones suggestion.
One doesn't need to be saved...few tempt each one within to seek salvation.
Notice that to meet during motion implies being set apart before being able to meet. This setting apart aka the internal differentiation of motion into matter...one can only discern for self as partial matter within whole motion.
If you choose to agree or disagree with that statement, then you established yet another meeting place, hence yet another contradiction of being ONE.