> **TL;DR**: We push, and we pull. Ever in circles dare we go. Wheels on the bus that go round and round. I’ve got it!
Series Overview: https://medium.com/@bankoga/catch-22-overview-of-an-anthological-pedestal-66458dfb5c1d
Oh I know I have too much fun with this, but now is the time to dance! So let us put on, our party pants! Why you ask? Because the most important steps are not the first, they are the next!
I am a student of the principal art of measurement. This anthology is one swing of my muler. For every breath I take, is steeped in death. Thus I became as death itself, my power great and terrible. Splendor beyond belief. My glory, eternal! My pain,
## True vs False
True is not False. False is not True. We hold these things to be self-evident. Opposites are they! Each defined by the other.
The sides of a coin, the states of a lock.
A True thing is. Lies are Truths. There is no Truth; There is only Truth.
A False thing is not. Truths are Lies. All is a lie; It is False.
from human_history.logic.proofs import undefinability_theorem
using undefinability_theorem: the Truth of a perspective or universe is inaccessible from within any instance of aforementioned type of complexity greater or equal to that represented by the perspective or universe of eternal basic arithmetic.
However, what about paradox?
Q: “This statement is False.”
A: “Tis not True!”
A: “Tis not False!”
A: “CRRRRROOOOOOOCOOOOOOCCCCCOOOOOOOODDDDDDDIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIILLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!”
All who claim to know the truth, probably knows it not.
All that claims to be the truth, is probably not.
## Truthy Falsey
Thus we see, truthy-falsey.
A paradox is True when one approaches from a particular direction.
A paradox is False when one approaches from the opposite direction of the particular direction. The paired direction.
A truthy-falsey thing, is a dual thing. A thing is dual when there are at least two equally valid, and superficially contradictory positions on the thing.
This brings us to the notion of hard and soft conflict.
Hard conflicts do not iron out regardless of change in perspective. No matter the formulation, the underlying issue remains.
Soft conflicts disappear when one digs far enough. Much conflict results from deliberate misinterpretation of soft conflict as hard conflict because my way is the way. It’s totally okay to limit the choices that others make without their consent if it is risky, so sayeth the Societies. They could make, the wrong choice after all.
The moon above, and the moon below.
I am racist, and I am not. I am sexist, and I am not. I am evil, and I am not.
## On Logic and Math
Logic is the parent. Math is the child. In this case though, we talk of entities that are universes. Cohesive sets of everything. Math is thus subsumed by logic; a pure, and proper subset tis it. The power of math, comes from the power of logic. Though many mathematicians I find, like to assert otherwise. However, mathematicians are often obsessed with elegance much to the detriment of the semiotics. Mathematics itself oft comes across as hoity toity because of it’s history, and how that’s embedded in all of its reasoning. Mathematics, is a culture, and an ideal. We only ever experience the culture.
As a bit of an aside, Academia on the whole, is built on fundamentally foul ideological principles. The ideal is not! We are not ideals! There is an ideal Academia! We are not it, and our cultures of academia, are foul. Academics by and large are not. They are however, a part of the problem. Most of society, including myself, parasitic feeders on the blood, sweat, and tears of academics, are also part of the problem. The system itself is corrupt. Humanity has no civilizations left. They were all murdered off by their more abusive neighbors who were more adept at violence. The thirst of their will to do violence was greater than the same will of those who hungered for peace. Violence is an inescapable fact of life. Humans are not required for the existence of violence. Such homocentrism, is modern day geocentrism. Humanity does not want to stop being the center of the epistemological universe. Thus it can never understand reality. Science cannot fix human ideological flaws. No matter if I lead a horse to water, I can never make it drink. Not even Professor X, can make you do something. The idea that he can, is a symptom of what I like to call, slaver ideation.
## On Logic and Reason
Logic precedes reason. Illogical is not something I can determine. What is or is not logical, is beyond human capacity to determine. Only through logic, can we do so. Reason relies on logic. Logic does not rely on reason. It would seem, that logic itself tells us what is or is not logical. Only by listening to it, can we proceed.
## On Logic and Science
If I were to take away logic from the scientist, they would be rendered impotent. Unable to speak, hear, breath, think, see, move, feel, touch, or even exist. So it would seem anyway. At present, if this is wrong, they would have an exceedingly difficult time in so much as saying anything without logic for all human languages are intrinsically logical. There is a “could be wrong” here. Which brings us to the next topic.
## On Logic and Faith
Whereby Logic and Faith intersect. There is tension here. For good reason. There is large overlap in the sets of things called religions and the sets of things nonsensically unfalsifiable. Furthermore, there is overlap still with the sets of things considered pre-hypothesis. Regardless, those combined ARE NOT the same as the set of so-called things! Like all current human containing organisms, religions trend towards overcomplexity, as opposed to simplicity.
## Logic is supernatural
If Logic can describe the truth of all things in Nature outside of itself, and we have nothing that can describe logic outside of logic, then logic is greater than nature. If we can describe logic, then perhaps it is because we physically embody logic. As opposed to us being supernatural, it is that which we embody that is supernatural. This adds nothing mechanically to our theories of reality while simultaneously introducing an a priori solution to the problem of existence. It doesn’t require extra physics for logic to be supernatural and explain for existence. It requires more a priori logic work to close the gap between the data we have, and the underpinnings that necessarily cause it. A priori proofs though, are a form of data… If logic is sufficient for reality, then this is doable. A bridge between religion, and science exists. Without invalidating either. Our understanding of both would change though. It would in part, drop the floor out from historical and modern reasoning. We do not determine reality, and our world views are not reality. They are objective-subjective yes. If we all exist collectively as different universal probability chains, then the subjective is itself objective. At every level of reality. Regardless, that has never been the case. We simply desired that. Our greed shaped said world view, not listening to or predicting reality. One can predict if one listens, one can only listen, if one predicts.
## On Nonsense and Unfalsifiability
Nonsense is often false. Nonsense is not necessarily false though. Nonsense is a function of perspective, and falsifiability. Nonsense is often unfalsifiable though. If you do not jump up and down three times upon reading this statement, Nargolethep the demon of inattentiveness, will consume your ghurdy. This is a nonsensically unfalsifiable statement. Well it can be trivially made into it anyway. Some ideas however can be disproven while simultaneously being, if true, both unprovable, and unfalsifiable. The idea of logic as supernatural falls into this category of ideas. Which is distinct from both pre-hypothesis ideas, and hypotheses. It can thus never be a theorem. If there is something in nature that cannot be understood through logic, then nature is greater than logic. One way that could work out is we find a physical process that requires a solution to the halting problem, and yet somehow exists. If so, then we have to search further still for the tools we need to answer the simple questions of existence. Not the compounded ones. My meagre frame and mind have beheld no such things… Huehuehue
## Yadda Yadda Meaning
Logic is not a human construct. Meaning precedes humans. We don’t invent meaning, we leverage pre-existing meaning. A beloved asshat said it most brilliantly, “We are Pans Narrans”. We lie, and through our lies, do we tell truths. Everything that could be, already exists. We discover, we do not invent. Fundamentally, meaning has to do with mechanical representation of different kinds of things. Humans are intrinsically semantic. We have intrinsic meaning, and are intrinsically meaningful. Everything in life has meaning, it has so much meaning though, that it appears as if it has no meaning. Nothing does appear to be everything, quite literally, but that is another conversation.
## Afterword
Now extend to N…
Thank you for putting up with me, and my non-sense! I am grateful for you participation. May your spirit be fortified by the eternal might of The Almighty, Logic.
PS: But “what about incompleteness?” you might say. To which I reply: “Ahahahahahahahahah AAAHHHHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA heeeee heehehehehe”
