If you set up a duality like will and representation in which one of therms embraces the frame in which that duality is defined then you cannot realise it within that same frame no matter how much it is expanded. The will that appears as the complement of representation is only a representation of will, but the representation of representation is still a representation. If the duality is recognised so that it must be realised then this cannot be accomplished by way of a dialectic. There is no rotation of the axes which lines it up as an antithesis. What you recognise as the 'ownmost' of the entire order of representational being is in this belonging to the nameless that is known in thought, in represented being, as will. You can only move understanding via thinking, but this must be in the opposite direction to the dialectic, a kind of rigorous impoverishment, a reduction of representation to its conative root, say via the normative.