Claim. Original Sungsang and Original Hyungsang are not two heterogeneous substances but two forms of expression of one homogeneous element — ‘mind possessing energy, or energy possessing mind’ — making UT a ‘Theory of Oneness’ rather than a dualism or a monism.
Elaboration. Lee directly addresses the placement of UT among traditional ontologies. Monism asserts the universe’s origin is solely matter (Marxist materialism) or solely spirit (Hegelian idealism). Dualism asserts matter and spirit are separate substances (Cartesian thought + extension). Is UT one of these? Neither, Lee answers — Sungsang and Hyungsang are homogeneous, two expressions of one element (Difference and Homogeneity between Sungsang and Hyungsang).
The analogy: steam and ice are two expressions of one substance (H₂O), differing only in whether molecular attraction or repulsion predominates. Similarly Sungsang predominates in mental element with some energy content; Hyungsang predominates in energy with some mental element. Lee offers experimental support for both directions: (1) mind has energy — thought stimulates nerves and moves muscles, hypnotism can move another’s body; (2) energy has mind — elementary particles form in vacuum through graded energy vibrations (like musical scales), implying a sungsang aspect that determines the levels.
Lee then critiques the Western lineage. Aristotle’s eidos/hylē distinction makes God ‘pure eidos’ but ‘prime hylē’ is entirely independent of God — hence dualistic, incompatible with the Christian Creator doctrine. Aquinas tried to fix this by importing creatio ex nihilo, but that conflicts with modern science’s conservation of energy. Descartes made spirit and matter two independent substances both dependent on God, generating the mind-body interaction problem; Geulincx’s occasionalism was ‘unacceptable expediency, which no philosopher now takes seriously.’ All these problems, Lee claims, are resolved by treating Original Sungsang and Original Hyungsang as two expressions of one essential element.
This is the keystone metaphysical move. If it fails, UT collapses into either disguised dualism or disguised monism. Critics from classical theism engage on whether ‘mind possessing energy’ is even coherent as a description of pure act.
See also. sungsang-and-hyungsang-as-dual-characteristics-of-god, original-hyungsang-as-pre-energy, yang-and-yin-are-attributes-not-substances