"Dialectical monism"? What an awkward name for a great philosophy.

[tama]

3. I'm very pleased

with your new acquaintance with Heraclitus, my all-time favorite Greek philosopher. If you want to dive deeper in his fragments, I recommend 'Heraclitus Seminar" by Martin Heidegger and Eugen Fink.

That same idea comes across also in physics: chirality, matter-antimatter duality, spin and other symmetries of co-dependent existence... of dialectical oppositions.

It was a Heidegger, or a Finnish book on Heidegger's reading on Aristotle, that taught me the origin of the notion of 'substance'. It's a Latin translation, via Aristotelian philosophy (to make a long and winding story very short) of the Greek word 'ousia', which is a noun derived from the verb 'be' (einai) and which had the common meaning of 'immovable property'/'real estate'. Space that a subject can control and call his own.

Scientific thought, which is an off-spring of Indo-European languages and and The (Substantive) Fall of the Greeks, has still that package of of metaphysics to haul, and the notions of supersymmetry, zero-energy ontology etc. are an dialectical antidote to metaphysics of substance, as is Buddhist notion of codependent causality: "If this arises, that arises; if this ceases, that ceases".

But in fact the dialectics of codependent oppositions is just a tune in Heraclitus symphony, that Plato took up and developed - or creatively misunderstood, as did Marxist dialectics etc . The deeper and original Heraclitean dialectics starts from putting the a-privative ahead of a-dialectics.

Somehow related, in my language the word 'know' (tietää) comes from the word 'tie', which means 'way', 'road', 'path'. So in that sense 'knowing' is simply your unique path. Tao, as some say.