Claim. East Asian metaphysics rooted in the I Ching (Book of Changes) correctly identifies yang and yin as universal but misses that all beings also possess internal nature and external form — which means it can identify the Great Ultimate (Tao) as the source of yang-yin polarity but fails to recognize that the Great Ultimate is a God with personality.
Elaboration. Per 1.2. The Relationship between God and the Universe: “from the Great Ultimate arose yang and yin, or the Word, and all things came into being based on the Word. Accordingly, the Great Ultimate is the First Cause of all existing beings, the integral nucleus and harmonious subject partner of yang and yin.” DP identifies this Great Ultimate with the God of John 1 (“the Word was with God, and the Word was God”).
The diagnostic critique: “this East Asian metaphysics observes the universe exclusively from the viewpoint of yang and yin while failing to recognize that all things also possess internal nature and external form. Therefore, although it reveals that the Great Ultimate is the subject partner of harmonious yang and yin, it fails to show that the Great Ultimate is also the subject partner of harmonious original internal nature and original external form. Hence, it does not comprehend that the Great Ultimate is a God with personality” (ibid).
DP frames this as completion-by-supplementation, not refutation: Oriental medicine’s success and the I Ching’s metaphysics are vindicated as far as they go, but require the Principle of Creation to be “fully elucidated.” This is DP’s general posture toward Asian thought — partial truth needing the missing dual-characteristics tier to become complete and personal.