The problem for cladistics and particle physics – classification (conceptualization)

(Before It's News)

Classification (and thus also conceptualization) offers two possible orthogonal systems of classification.

1. One is to distinguish mono-classes, like “green”, “red”, “yellow” and “brown”, in poly-classes, like “green and red” and “yellow and brown”.

2. The other is to distinguish poly-classes, like “green and red”, “green and blue”,  “yellow and brown” and “yellow and blue”, in mono-classes, like “green” and “yellow”.

These two systems may appear as, and indeed are, “two sides of the same coin”, but the problem for classification (and thus also for conceptualization) is that they can’t fuse into one coin, as Bertrand Russell demonstrated with his paradox, because poly-classes are ambiguous to, and thus actually fundamentally contradictory to, mono–classes. “The coin” is thus in practice “a void”.

This fact may be difficult to understand, but the fundamental problem is that a fusion of the two systems into “a single coin” requires that present equals past, which would conflate classification (and thus also conceptualization) at its most fundamental level (as cladistics and particle physics also do, on the contrary to Linnean systematics). These two kinds of systems thus simply can’t be fused without conflating classification (and thus also conceptualization) at its most fundamental level. (The former actually classifies pattern in process, whereas the latter classifies process in pattern.)

Now, this fact is visible only at this meta-level of both kinds of systems of classification, not in each of them. Instead, the former appears consistent (ie, consistently consistent), whereas the latter appears “natural” (but thus actually is inconsistent, actually paradoxically contradictory, or consistently inconsistent). It means that advocates of the two kinds of systems do neither understand each other nor that the “the coin” is in practice “a void”. They simply can’t see that they represent two possible orthogonal systems of classification, the middle of which is a void..Seeing this fact requires raising to the meta-level of the two systems.

This fact also means that we can’t reach a single truth, because we can’t reach a single consistent and unambiguous classification. Sorry to say.

• Why we can’t reach a single truth about reality
• If you search a belief, then don’t join science
• What is the “Higgs field”?
• Why are particle physicists lying about Higgs particle?
• The black hole in conceptualization – the opposite to object
• The difference between Linnean systematics and cladistics in a nutshell
• The Swedish physicist Ulf Danielsson and science
• Naztech 10400mAh Universal Power Bank [Review]
• VMware Self-Service without “Tax”
• Six Packs Of Quarks: Exotic Particle Confirmed