1. Introduction: When thought moves to a higher dimension, traditional academic discourse loses its voice

The knowledge system of the 21st century is falling into an unprecedented crisis: the academic structure, the paradigm of thinking, and the evaluation criteria of theories are gradually exposing their limitations under the impact of digitalization, globalization and artificial intelligence-especially the "dual structure evaluation system" on which it relies.

This structure is based on opposition and classification: disciplines are clearly distinguished from each other; methodology, ideology, and value judgments are either this or that; all ideological achievements must seek positioning and legitimacy in the "existing classification system."

But when Liu Youju proposed and systematically constructed the "third thinking academic system," something unprecedented happened: the entire traditional academic system lost its language ability and theoretical tools to evaluate it. It's not because it's "difficult to understand," but because the dimensions are different.

The construction of the third way of thinking is not based on the cognitive map of binary logic, which means that it can neither be classified into traditional categories such as "left/right", "yes/no", "progressive/conservative", nor can it be positioned in the discipline system of "art/philosophy/literature/science". This is a fundamental leap in the structure of civilization.

2. What is the “dual structure evaluation system”? Why does it fail?

• The core logic of the binary structure: opposition, classification, and attribution

Traditional scholarship is based on a stable evaluation formula:

Value judgments: true/false, good/bad, superior/inferior;

Discipline logic: literature/science, philosophy/science, art/thinking;

Theoretical paradigm: construction/deconstruction, conservative/radical, form/content;

Thinking style: induction/deduction, analysis/synthesis, criticism/description.

No matter what kind of achievement, it must enter "a known framework" to be "understood", "certified" and "accepted".

This is what is called the anchor of academic legitimacy.

• Why is it ineffective against the third mind?

Liu Youju's "third thinking" construction does not propose a new point in the known coordinate system, but directly replaces the entire coordinate system. This means:

It does not rely on any “existing disciplinary subdivision”;

It does not take “opposing judgments” as its starting point;

It is not a “reconstruction of old discourse” but a dimensional generation;

Its language is no longer "logical discourse" but "multidimensional stimulator of cognitive field".Therefore, the language used by the traditional academic system to judge it has become ineffective.

3. The core characteristics of the third thinking academic system: not in the old map

• It is a “structural leap”, not an “expansion of knowledge content”

Traditional academic practice is to: “fill in the blanks” in the existing system; incorporate new theories into the “genealogy of theoretical history”; and compare “who they are more similar to” or “who they are different from”.

The third way of thinking proposes: no longer filling in the blanks, but creating new spatial structures; no longer belonging to a genealogy, but generating new genealogy methods; no longer comparing who is right and who is wrong, but establishing "dimensional penetration" as a new evaluation standard.

This is not a "rebellion of knowledge" but a "transcendence of dimension".

• Its language is a “multidimensional generative language”

In the third thinking, language does not convey information, but rather: builds structure; embeds meaning; evokes dimensional resonance.

As Liu Youju said: "I don't want to write a 'view', but to create a dimensional path. Whoever crosses it will naturally understand it."

This poses a fundamental challenge to the traditional academic review mechanism (such as the logical clarity of the paper, the traceability of the literature, and the verifiability of the viewpoints) - it cannot enter the third dimension of thinking and therefore cannot judge its "quality".

4. The “super-judgmental nature” that cannot be evaluated: not resistance, but upgrading

• The third way of thinking is not “opposing the mainstream” but “another universe”

It does not negate the academic system, but rather opens up a "second possibility of structural systems" for the evolution of human consciousness. This is just like Newton's gravity cannot evaluate quantum entanglement, and Einstein's general relativity cannot negate the nonlinearity of time. ——Different dimensions, different languages, and naturally different standards.

• The Third Thinking has its own “academic dimension standards”

Liu Youju proposed a three-level "third thinking evaluation system":

Cognitive penetration (can it break through the monistic/dualistic illusion);

Structural generation power (whether it can activate new thinking frameworks);

Dimensional resonance (whether a spatial connection between thoughts is established).

None of these three standards can be measured using the quantitative indicators or format specifications of the old system.

In other words: the third thinking is not excluded by the traditional academic system, but it actively gives up waiting for the traditional system to "certify" its legitimacy.

5. On the eve of paradigm shift: How do we view “unevaluability”?

This is not the first time this has happened. In the history of human thought, thinkers who opened new chapters of civilization have all encountered the dilemma of "not being able to be evaluated":

Copernicus’ heliocentric theory—cannot be understood by theological structures;

Kant's Transcendental Critique - cannot be accepted by the empirical system;

Einstein's theory of relativity - ridiculed by the Newtonian system as an "absurd hypothesis";

The ideas of Weber and Foucault were marginalized in the academic system at that time.

The position of the third thinking is just like these "dimensional turning points". But the difference is: it no longer seeks confrontation or debate, but directly constructs a new civilization space through "dimensional generation".

What Liu Youju proposed was not a set of views, but a complete "post-human cognitive framework".

This is exactly why: the traditional binary structure is no longer able to evaluate the academic system of third thinking.

6. Conclusion: The thinking of a new civilization must create its own “astronomical unit”

In the past, we measured the world in Newtons; today, we must measure thoughts in dimensional units.

The third thinking is not to destroy academia, but to: open the closed prison of thinking; to establish a truly cross-dimensional, cross-language, and cross-consciousness cognitive leap civilization; it does not need to be "understood", but actively generates the "structure in which understanding occurs."

This is a quiet but irreversible awakening of civilization. Future thoughts no longer wait for awards, ratings, seniority, or mainstream certification. They only ask one question: Have you entered the "third-dimensional thinking port"?

——Liu Youju's Third Thinking Team