Understanding the Structure of Being – 3

Causality and the Persistence of the Chain of Events

In everyday experience, causality—the relationship between causes and their effects—feels like an undeniable truth. We assume that every event has a cause, and every action, a corresponding effect. The idea that one event follows another is so deeply ingrained in our understanding of the world that it often goes unquestioned. However, the notion of causality presents a challenge, forcing us to reconsider our most fundamental assumptions about reality.

The Illusion of Causal Progression

In the realm of becoming, causality appears as a progression—a chain of events stretching from one moment to the next. We see cause and effect unfolding over time, with each event giving rise to the next. This linear view of causality seems self-evident because it aligns with our experience of time as a continuous flow. Yet, this flow itself, as previously discussed, is an illusion—a product of perception rather than an inherent structure of being.

All of being is eternal and unchanging. The idea of an event leading to another is not a progression in time but an appearance within time. Events do not “cause” one another in the way traditionally understood. Instead, they all appear as part of the eternal structure of being, each necessarily manifesting in its own moment without altering or evolving into the next.

Causality and the Limits of Perspective: The Role of Contraddizione C

Why, then, does causality seem so real? The answer lies in the difference between the whole and the part—what has been called contraddizione C. From the perspective of the whole, there is no sequence of causes and effects; all things exist eternally in their necessity. But from the perspective of the part—that is, from a finite and conditioned viewpoint—events appear fragmented, sequential, and causally linked. This contradiction between the whole (where necessity reigns) and the part (where events appear contingent and causal) is what gives rise to the experience of causality.

A helpful analogy is that of a book, a film, or a symphony. Every page, every frame, every note exists simultaneously, yet the reader, viewer, or listener experiences the story or composition progressively, as if one moment causes the next. The sequence is not an unfolding of becoming but an ordered revealing of what already is. Similarly, the chain of events perceived in time is not a process of becoming but the structured appearing of that which must be, exactly as it is, within the eternal framework of Being.

The Paradox of Free Will and Necessity

This understanding challenges traditional views of free will, agency, and responsibility. If everything is necessary, if nothing truly changes or evolves, where does that leave action and decision-making? How can the apparent freedom of choice be reconciled with the idea of eternal necessity?

These are profound questions, touching on some of the deepest anxieties surrounding this perspective. However, they also raise another significant concern: Does the rejection of causality as commonly understood point to a bleak, meaningless existence? If events are all necessary and fixed, can there be room for meaning, value, or purpose?

This line of thinking leads directly into the next crucial question, which will be addressed in the next article: The Fear of Nihilism: Is an Eternal Reality Meaningless? Here, we will explore whether the recognition of the eternal, immutable nature of being—far from leading to despair or nihilism—actually restores meaning and depth to existence, transcending the limitations of time and change.