The popular conception of the Cuil is heavily informed by the thought of Immanuel Kant. In The Critique of Pure Reason, Kant lays out what he describes as his „Copernican Revolution“. He insists that the world we experience is informed by the world as it truly is and the restraints of our own consciousness. Thus, we can never really know what's happening in the world as it truly exists except that it has a role in shaping the world that we experience. Kant believed this realization was similar to realizing that the sun, not earth, is at the center of the solar system.

Cuil Philosophers believe that as the study of Cuil advances, we'll approach an understanding that will show that the Cuil level of a situation is equivalent to the number of sets of limits of consciousness are being superimposed over the world as it really is.

For example, a 2 Cuill abstraction occurs when the world as it truly is informs a world of experience in conjunction with one set of consciousness constraints, and that the world of experience would then inform a second world of experience in conjunction with a second set of consciousness constraints.

At this early point in Cuil theory researchers and theoreticians are hampered by the recursive nature of Cuility. Consider the student of Cuil as necessarily introducing an added layer of context – merely reading someone else's theories thereby adds another layer of Cuil to those theories by way of the observer's own constraining consciousness. Until meaningful depth studies are completed even the 3 and 4 Cuil situations this engenders can be too complex to analyze within our current models, let alone the 6+ Cuil levels easily achievable in an attempted work group. Of course among the radical intellectual fringe you will find the suggestion that achieving these maximal Cuil levels should be the primary goal of researchers. (For further arguments along this line look into the Cuil work of Drs. Jean Lillard or Tom O'Leary)

You may have noticed that Cuils seem to be closely related to the truth of a situation. This would seem to place them within the classical school developed by Plato. The idea of absolute truth, or complete knowledge, should theoretically exist in order for Cuils to have relevance. What the interaction is between truth for Cuils, and truth for the human organism, is yet to be developed.

I've always wondered what the physical structure of a mesh that connected everything would look like. I used to think it would be interesting to see what it would look like if you could come up with some defining characteristic of the way that everything is related to everything else, and then suspend all the bits of reality in a lattice that was comprised of gradients of interconnectedness. </cite>The prophet Reddyenumber4</cite>

Grand Mesh Theory (GMT) states that below our level of perception lies an infinite mesh, a grid that connects us all and flows for infinity in all directions. Everything in the universe lies upon this mesh and in a constant state of flow around the center. The Cuil is the distance, the measurement, the defining characteristic of the space between objects on the mesh, the Cuil is not an arbitrary number, it flows like the objects flow and its value can only be assigned at the time of observation – Grand Mesh Theorists believe that Cuil does not have discrete, easily defined and countable events but is a more fluid logarithmic scale.

To better visualize GMT imagine a color wheel attached to a pencil, the color wheel is the mesh, the colors on it represent all the objects and events being played out upon the mesh and the point where the pencil meets the wheel is Zero Cuil. Now holding the pencil in between your hands you spin the wheel - looking down upon it the colors shift and move spiraling towards the center, towards Zero Cuil. You are seeing the objects and event in the universe happening and the Cuil is the distance between those objects and events as they happen at the time of observation. At the center Zero Cuil then stretches back, along the pencil, stretching back to -∞‽. This is a crude description of such a new and vast concept but some have found it helpful in understanding GMT.

0‽ or Zero Cuil is the center of the mesh – towards which everything flows, striving to become 0‽ - some Cuil philosophers believe 0‽ in unattainable because 0‽ is constantly moving towards -∞‽ The Reddye-number and thus unreachable.

The Reddye-number

If there is such a thing as a unified theory of everything, it is represented by the absolute negative lower bound of Cuil, as it is the most all-encompassing real thing possible. The prophet Reddyenumber4

At the centre, at 0‽ it is theorised there exists another scale, negative Cuils stretching back from 0‽ away from us reaching to -∞‽ also known as The Reddye-number – the most all-encompassing real thing possible. It is to the Reddye-number that all things subconsciously strive to reach, to be united in the most real sense possible. At the Reddye-number there are no Cuils. Zero Cuils between everything. For ‽<0. As the number of Cuils in a situation decreases, the number of possible objects and events decrease as well. Therefore, when the number of Cuils is negative infinity, the Universe is reduced to a single point. This singular point is a philosophical construct as much as it is a hyperreal point in space. This is not relative but rather an absolute definition of the platonic concept of existence. That is, this point in it's absolute reality, is as representative as any „object“ could possibly be of the very concept of existence.

Some philosophers argue against Cuil absolutely, suggesting that the potential for abstraction is „just some bullshit“ and „there's just some stuff, y'know?“ The ontology of the argument fundamentally rests on the Things That Are There, arguing that because stuff is just there and then things happen to it that that's all there is to it. If the „stuff“ in question seems strange or „gets weird on you“ then it's a previously unrealized property of the stuff in question, which means you weren't paying good attention. Cuilists customarily respond that freaking out about something makes it weirder, so even if the thing was weird to begin with the observer's interaction with the thing made it weirder.