The way of control is in the way of the controlled. The concept of control is what prevents control. It implies something must be controlled.
Now we get to three dimensional beings, but first a rewind… In two dimensional space the circles would be their mystics. They would be the ones able to understand unity from their personal perspective. A circle would be the two dimensional spaces Buddha.
Now in the third dimension, we can begin to understand the philosophy of mechanism which is actually linked to today’s topic of atomism. In two dimensional space, mechanism is impossible to understand. All that exists in two dimensional space exists as a self evident object. It’s either a square or it isn’t there.
In our space, we can see things as collections of parts and begin to understand the world in a deterministic way, cause and effect. We understand time better than the two dimensional flatlanders do. For them, things exist until they stop existing when their “number” is up. So Plato would have made sense to two dimensional beings.
On/off, binary. Actually, binary existence is one dimensional. They understand the end of a set, end of sequence. Two dimensional beings could do math, and compute. To them, the entire universe would very obviously be mathematical. To us is it that clear?
Hence we’ve gone to calculus? Yes, that’s part of it. In fact, even hard core rational scientists comment on how strange it is that we are challenged to do math yet we excel at prediction, probabilistic reasoning. We judge how likely things are fairly easily, and we track time by the change in relationship between objects in our experience, in a mechanistic way. Two dimensional beings cannot have experience as we do, they only have computational orientation. They exist in only one state at any given time, and we can track a series of states of being, even experience a complex mix of states of being simultaneously.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.