Laozi’s Ming (name), Qi (tangible part) and Dao (intangible part), coexisting in the same substance, can be compared with Heidegger’s triad existences: Seiende (being), Dasein (beings) and Sein (to be). In Laozi, Dao is the essential metonymy for the existence of things from Wu (void, nothing) to You (there is, reality). The effect of Dao is De (virtue) and the combined term of them is Dao-De (morality). By conceptual blend theory, we may draw the following conclusion from the perspective of Heidegger’s ontology of triad existences and Laozi’s Dao with its companions: any being (Seiende or Ming) exists in the form of combination beings (Dasein or Qi) and to be (Sein or Dao). According to Proper Parts Principle, if z, x, y is used to represent being, beings and to be respectively, then, the expression of all things will be the form: z∃ (x) ⊕ y. In terms of independent concept and function, Dao exists as whole. While from Laozi’s triangular relationship among Ming, Dao and Qi, Dao can be considered as a proper parthood, too. Both Laozi and Heidegger emphasized that existence is changing, but Heidegger attributed the reason for change to time, while Laozi to Dao. Dao can be considered as way, essence, nothingness, empty, void etc. in structure, but it doesn’t mean it’s zero or none-existing. On the contrary, it is a form of existence from exotic domain. Both the numeric expression of Heidegger’s triad existences and Laozi’s triangle existences of Dao with its companions can be written as "z∃x (1) ⊕ y(Ø) Û z{1, Ø}. In which, Ø is empty set as Laozi’s Dao or Heidegger’s Sein (Ø Û 0).

Based on the analysis of phenomenology and etymology, we argue that as three different components of Chinese philosophy, Confucianism, Taoism and Buddhism focus on human beings’ transcendence of behavior, body, and mind, which is made concrete as Ming (name of reputation), Qi (physical body), and Dao(way)-De(virtue), respectively. Chinese philosophy has its own system, but it is still a philosophical component in ontology, and its constituent elements are identified as “affirmative universal” by Euler’s Identity Diagrams in contrast both to existences in Heidegger’s triad Seinede-Dasein-Sein ontology, i.e., Being-Beings-To be, and to Freud’s triple self-Ego, Id (body-ego), and Superego. Taoism shapes the physical id with the “Type 1” natural Dao(way) personality”,Buddhism shapes the bodhisattva”Type-1” selfless De(virtue) personality and Confucianism pursues the mediocre”Type 0” social Dao-de(morality)personality”. Therefore, when q equals p, the ideal personality shaped by Chinese philosophy is the perfect combination of the three, displaying its “affirmative particular” unity in elemental composition and the ideal realm of Chinese philosophy follows the Euler’s Identify. Individuals who believe in the tenets of Chinese philosophy should have the personality of triadic mixtures. Nevertheless, one may become an extremely selfish hypocrites wearing social masks while one’s morality value reaches 1.