I ask myself - what cannot be analyzed. The analytical thinker's manual states that "The one without the identities which are common to all cannot be analyzed." I am again confused with the truth of this statement! Could you help me in explain in this statement?
The only way we learn is by comparing objects to other objects and ultimately defining what makes each one unique. We take two somewhat similar things (man, animal or animal, tree or tree, chair) and sift through their differences and similarities to arrive at what defines each object, what makes them unique. The one thing without the qualities (identities) which are common to all can't be analyzed because it can't be compared to anything else. If it can't be compared to anything else we can't aquire any knowledge of it.
To clarify a little, when you define what an apple is you might say "This is an apple and it can't be compared to an orange!" In a certain sense you are correct - they have different colors, different odors, different tastes, they come from different trees, etc. Yet in another sense they do share a common "identity", or quality, and that is that of fruit. Fruit can't be compared to vegetables in terms of how you define fruit exclusively - that definition is exactly what excludes it from being a vegetable! Yet both share another, more universal identity - edible. And so on and so forth, but if you ever were to reach an object without ANY of the identities which are common to all, it would be impossible to analyze or define it. In fact our minds can't really conceive of the nature of such an object.
Hope that helps a little.