I appreciate your voice in the vast sea of voices, and it has made a difference thanks for the interesting commentary on the topic
Also, could you explain to me what is meant by ‘metaphysical primary’
Sure. Give me just a bit…
Thank you! That’s very, very nice of you to say. And very nice to hear.:-)
The metaphysical primary is the absolute irreducible root of all things. It is ontological essence from which all things arise and act. It is the absolute comonality which all things share in equal measure within all.
Now, this is paradoxical because the metaphysical primary–that which IS everything at its/their irreducible root–must allow for a plurality of things. It must imply distinction from what is ABSOLUTELY non-distinct. It must be the infinite source of all other philosophical categories whilst allowing those distinct categories to actually BE rationally and efficaciously (practically) distinct.
This, to me, is where philosophy has historically failed. It has yet to define a metaphysic which reconciles the ostensible contradiction. I submit that my primary does reconcile it but as I have already exceeded the scope of your question, I won’t go into detail about that right now.
Sometimes I refer to the Individual or the Collective as the metaphysical primary. This is fine for most argumentative contexts, as people usually understand what is meant by this…add to that the fact Collectivism is so utterly irrational that to me it’s impossible to formulate a metaphysical primary for it–you’re kind of forced to make the collective the primary. (How do you establish a foundational root of madness? The infinite inconsistency disallows the formulation of any single root.) But it’s not entirely accurate. Individual/Collective are actually epistemological notions I think, and ethical primaries.
unreformingtheology 
I appreciate your voice in the vast sea of voices, and it has made a difference thanks for the interesting commentary on the topic
Also, could you explain to me what is meant by ‘metaphysical primary’
Sure. Give me just a bit…
Thank you! That’s very, very nice of you to say. And very nice to hear.:-)
The metaphysical primary is the absolute irreducible root of all things. It is ontological essence from which all things arise and act. It is the absolute comonality which all things share in equal measure within all.
Now, this is paradoxical because the metaphysical primary–that which IS everything at its/their irreducible root–must allow for a plurality of things. It must imply distinction from what is ABSOLUTELY non-distinct. It must be the infinite source of all other philosophical categories whilst allowing those distinct categories to actually BE rationally and efficaciously (practically) distinct.
This, to me, is where philosophy has historically failed. It has yet to define a metaphysic which reconciles the ostensible contradiction. I submit that my primary does reconcile it but as I have already exceeded the scope of your question, I won’t go into detail about that right now.
Sometimes I refer to the Individual or the Collective as the metaphysical primary. This is fine for most argumentative contexts, as people usually understand what is meant by this…add to that the fact Collectivism is so utterly irrational that to me it’s impossible to formulate a metaphysical primary for it–you’re kind of forced to make the collective the primary. (How do you establish a foundational root of madness? The infinite inconsistency disallows the formulation of any single root.) But it’s not entirely accurate. Individual/Collective are actually epistemological notions I think, and ethical primaries.