Only the true exist

‘Original Goodness’ as procedural completeness

A Synthesis of Finn’s Minimal Ontology and His Doctrine of Original Goodness

By Bodhangkur

Abstract

This essay offers a systematic synthesis of Finn’s doctrine of Original Goodness with his procedural ontology of quantised emergence. The central claim—“Only the true exist”—is defended through a precise distinction between (i) ontological truth as completeness of minimal units, and (ii) epistemic falsity as a temporary local mis-reading within an emergent’s interface.
Errors, illusions, sins, delusions, and apparent “evil” are shown to be misinterpretations of true events rather than ontologically false phenomena.
Original Goodness emerges not as a moral assertion, but as the unavoidable consequence of procedural completeness: every quantum is whole; every emergent is composed of true quanta; therefore every emergent is fundamentally true—and thus good as what it is.

1. Introduction: A reversal of metaphysical history

For millennia philosophy and religion have operated on the assumption that reality comes in two grades:

· the true vs the false

· the pure vs the impure

· the real vs the illusory

· the enlightened vs the deluded

· the saved vs the fallen

Finn’s synthesis denies every one of these dualisms.

He proposes instead:

Original Goodness — the foundational rightness of existence
Procedural Truth — the completeness of every emergent unit
Identity-as-Constraint — the local form of this completeness

These combine into the radical axiom:

Only the true exist.

Everything that exists is true as what it is, and everything that appears false is:

a mis-interpretation of true events by a locally constrained emergent whose signalling system has erred.

This is a complete inversion of the Christian, Buddhist, Platonic, and Advaitic metaphysics of lack, error, impurity, or illusion.

2. Truth as completeness: The ontological ground

Finn’s Minimal Ontology begins with a simple observation:

If energy is quantised, then every quantum is complete.

Completeness is neither moral nor theological. It means:

· the unit cannot be otherwise than it is

· it expresses its constraints faithfully

· it is self-consistent in behaviour

· it is whole, not fractured

This completeness is the definition of truth in a procedural universe.

Thus:

· A photon is true

· A gluon is true

· A collision is true

· A mammal is true

· A panic attack is true

· A mistake is true

True not in the sense of morally right, but in the sense of:

wholly itself.

This eliminates ontological falsehood from the universe.

3. ‘Original Goodness’ as the ethically neutral consequence of Truth

In Finn’s system, “good” means:

functionally optimal given constraints.

If every quantum is complete, then each quantum is optimal within the limits of what it is.

Thus:

· A quark is optimally what a quark is

· A bacterium is optimally what a bacterium is

· A human is optimally what a human is under its actual constraints

This is Original Goodness:
a universe without ontological fault-lines.

This view sharply contrasts with:

· Augustine’s Original Sin

· Paul’s universal guilt

· Buddha’s universal dissatisfaction

· Shankara’s universal illusion

Each of those doctrines begins with a deficit—a lack, a wrongness, a fall.

Finn begins with completeness.

4. If only the true exist, what is the false?

This is the key question.

The false cannot exist as an ontic entity because a “false thing” would have to be:

· incomplete

· non-self-consistent

· unbound

· unstable

· incapable of impacting

But such a thing could not generate effects, and therefore could not be observed or enter causal networks.

Thus falsehood cannot be ontological.

Where then does the false come from?

Finn’s answer:

The false is a local interface error: a mis-reading of a true event by a constrained emergent.

This requires careful unpacking.

5. The Origin of Falsehood: Local misreading within finite interfaces

Every emergent (“1”) is a bounded signalling unit.
Its sensory and interpretative apparatus is:

· limited

· evolutionarily biased

· noisy

· incomplete

· local

These constraints produce:

· illusions

· delusions

· mis-classifications

· false beliefs

· flawed predictions

· emotional distortions

But these are not false beings. They are false interpretations.

The events themselves—the physical triggers, the hormones, the signals, the collisions—are all true.

Thus:

A hallucination is true as a neural pattern, false only as a world-model.
A lie is true as an utterance, false only relative to an intended referent.
A delusion is true as cognitive behaviour, false only in mapping external states.

This distinction is Finn’s critical innovation:

Falsehood is always epistemic. Never ontological.

The universe contains no false entities.
Only emergents can be mistaken.

6. The claim: ‘Only the true exist’

Formalising Finn’s maxim.

6.1. Premises

P1. Energy is quantised; quanta are complete.
P2. Completeness is the minimal definition of truth.
P3. All emergents are composed of quanta.
P4. All emergents express constraint-true behaviour under their geometry.
P5. Falsehood arises only in the interpretations constructed by emergent interfaces.

6.2. Conclusion

Only true entities exist.
The alleged false are locally and erroneously observed variations of the true.

Thus:

· There are no false particles

· No false forces

· No false collisions

· No false mammals

· No false experiences

· Only false interpretations

False interpretations do not negate the underlying truth of events.

7. Examples that clarify the ontology

7.1. Mirage in a desert

The mirage is true as a refractive optical phenomenon.
The interpretation “there is water” is false.

The false is in the observer, not in the world.

7.2. A morally evil act

The act is (self-) true as behaviour.
The interpretation “this act promotes systemic survival” is false.

The structure is true; the belief about its utility is false.

7.3. A delusional hallucination

The hallucination is true as neural activity.
It is false as a model of external states.

No false entity appears—only a false mapping.

7.4. A theological myth

The myth is true as cultural expression and neural pattern.
It is false as a literal description of ontology.

Myths are procedurally true: they encode adaptive meaning.
They are epistemically false when misread as physics.

8. The Synthesis: Truth, Goodness, and Procedure

Now the synthesis can be stated concisely:

Truth is completeness of action.
Goodness is the local optimality of completeness.
Falsehood is the failure of an emergent to read completeness correctly.

Thus:

· Truth is ontological.

· Goodness is functional.

· Falseness is epistemic.

This triad collapses metaphysics, ethics, and epistemology into procedural relations.

9. Final Statement: ‘Original Goodness’ secures Original Truth

Finn’s doctrine stands as follows:

1. The universe consists only of complete units (quanta).

2. Completeness constitutes truth.

3. Emergent configurations inherit the truth of their constituents.

4. Apparent falsity (i.e. variations of truth) derives entirely from local interpretive limitations.

5. Therefore only the true exist (i.e. ‘Every one is God in their space.’)

6. Hence Original Goodness: existence is fundamentally right as what it is.

Nothing is ontologically wrong.
Nothing is metaphysically fallen.
Nothing is fundamentally corrupt.
Nothing is unreal.
Nothing is illusion.
Nothing is sin.

Only local misunderstandings occur.

Thus Finn’s synthesis places human error not in being but in interpretation.
Existence itself is always correct.

What Finn discussed with ChatGPT

Only the true transact

Your groceries prove the universe is real

Home