Online: | |
Visits: | |
Stories: |
Story Views | |
Now: | |
Last Hour: | |
Last 24 Hours: | |
Total: |
The fundamental problem for rationality in discussing reality is that its tool “classes” is inconsistent.
This problem (fact) means that it does not matter that rationality is logically consistent, when there actually are two orthogonal entrances (ie, assumptions) to it: assuming that classes are real or assuming that classes are human inventions, whereof the former ultimately leads to paradoxical contradiction and the latter ultimately leads to ambiguity. Rationality will ultimately end up in either paradoxical contradiction or ambiguity – an interface also known as Russell’s paradox.
This problem (fact) caused the downfall of the ancient Greek rationalist approach and does also create problems for today’s rationalist approach (presently being mitigated by the insane rationalist invention “Higgs particle” and the outrageous claim of having found it).
Today, we’re however better equipped to avoid a downfall of the rationalist approach by having solved the mathematics of reality. We can now count on reality in terms of quantum mechanics, although we can’t understand what reality is. It means that we can continue expanding our understanding of reality blind-folded (ie, not understanding what it is). If this possibility suffices to avoid a downfall of rationalism remains to be seen, but if not, I bet it’ll be back in about 2000 years or so (if humanity still exists by then).
Another contribution to understanding of conceptualization http://menvall.wordpress.com/