 |
A Paradigm is one of many 'gravity'fields of Life, a Conceptual Scheme = cultural logic.
Ludwig Wittgenstein warns that human made logical AGREEMENTS (conceptual schemes) about what is sensed can turn into paradigms (the way things are). As written by him: So you are saying that human agreement decides what is true and what is false. It is what human beings say that is true and false; and they agree in the language they use. That is not agreement in opinions but in forms of life. Ludwig Wittgenstein (1958): Philosophical Investigations I,241. Oxford: Blackwell
| 'Philosophy' should prescibe with common sense when to use which (relative) logic |
A paradigm, as partial reality, is not a bloodless abstraction (some reference manual made into law; law as 'all what I have words for'). Humans in every selfmade corner of reality are passionate/willful beings, using logic (law) only as a tool.
A sensed part of reality (a 'common sense world') has only a logical relation with human 'word' abstractions
like 'democracy', 'safety', 'freedom of speech', 'rational world',.. (conceptual schemes).
For instance associating 'generals' with panic, pain, hunger, being worn out, ....Egyptian reality (a paradigm) made the Egyptian people tolerate 30 years of military oppression (with face Mubarak). Egyptian reality ('the way things are') was a split reality of 'the luxurous rational world of the generals' , and as 'the poor' trying to stay alife for say 2 dollars per day. Reality of Egyptian 'poor' is fight, and is much more than only 'word'. Their conceptual scheme is expressed by their behavior in 21st century Egypt resulting from ALL their senses, trying to survive (sub)reality as dictated by those 'in power' as 'law and order' (labor + law + courts + judges). Survival-behavior might be either 'obeying=pro' or resisting=anti. And can result in murderous fights between pro and anti, both outside power.
Making a conceptual scheme to change your standpoint in all those paradigms in your own sense reality, is like travelling by rocket
to the moon.
Effective change of standpoint in life is a hell of a job.
Exploited people sense reality TOTALLY different from those in power . That way in Egyptian reality 'the people' might with all means aim for survival and 'the generals' might with 'rational violence' aim for 'democracy', 'safety', 'order', 'peace with Israel', 'peace with US'. If as Egyptian 'general' you don't recognize and respect the traffic signs of 'the people' for a long time, and as 'political leader' keep racing through social 'red lights' while calling such behavior 'defending democracy' and 'rational'. Than finally your behavior stops making sense in this other paradigm. It is non-sense (logic) to judge Egyptian culture with 'rational' logic from inside 'palaces' and 'embassies', behind firewalls of law (police and army).
A paradigm shift is joining the effective sides of 'law' in a new common sense and more than shattering the oppressive religion 'law'. In the Egyptian example: the 'structure' in 'power' is effective, try to make pro-power and anti-power into useful power.
Friedrich Nietzsche:
Suppose nothing else were "given" as real except our world of desires and passions, [..], and to ask the question whether this "given" would not be sufficient [..].Suppose, finally, we succeeded in explaining our entire instinctive life as [..] will to power, [..] The world viewed from inside... it would be "will to power" and nothing else. from Beyond Good and Evil, s.36, Walter Kaufmann transl.
.
A Paradigm is Sensed SubReality
To get VERBALLY grip on it (with 'words'), and possibly also visual, a paradigm can be reduced to set of beliefs or to a list of rules (conceptual schemes).
But paradigms cannot be 'caught' in laws (words, drawings, ...). When the meaning of words changes, conceptual schemes change too but the paradigm itself does not change with them.
Scientists have to learn 'the way things are' by PUZZLING with ALL senses, by leaping to completely 'philosophically' different standpoints (in all senses) and by doing physical try outs and using logic. And by TRAINING (of all senses) in the temporarily best BEHAVIOR. A layer of unlimited reality (a paradigm) is by puzzling researchers simulated in a 'conceptual scheme' of that reality (a text, a drawing, a song, a sculpture, a smell 'opera'...), and results in a TINY TINY virtual reality.
First you have unlimited reality, then you have unlimited subreality, then you have the limited sensed subreality (paradigm), and then there is an even more limited virtual reality in some piece of sense-art called 'conceptual scheme' (examples: Discourse on Methods (e-text) of Rene Descartes and Critique of Pure Reason by Immanuel Kant. And a 'rabit-tian' conceptual scheme might be used to 'judge' some 'duck-lim' behaviour as 'suspicious'
Realize that 99,999 out of 100,000 humans never heard of conceptual schemes, and just sense 'rabbit-tians' or 'duck-lims'.
Beautiful instinctively vehement reacting human animals, perfectly adapted to their self created paradigm. And they will, if stimulated, furiously resist change.
An example of the currently accepted conceptual scheme for a paradigm is the presently standard model of physics (a visual model made into 'words' = western science).
The acceptance of subrealities and the simulation approach of paradigms through conceptual schemes often is called conceptual relativism, because conceptual relativists realize that it is a necessity to accept that there are many different schemes for behavior. Then uniting people is bringing sense experiences together (and not War on 'Terrorism').
Quite different from the view that our 'ratio 'makes' our reality ('reality is rational' = rationalism = idealism; Immanuel Kant until Donald Davidson).
Leaping in the same spatial subreality to another way of sensing that subreality is a paradigm shift. A sensed subreality (paradigm) still is unlimited, and ideas (conceptual schemes) are only very shallow approximations. Linear extrapolation for those aspects over more than 1 paradigm is non-sense. When for instance kids have reinvented sex as innocent physical game and psychological damage as hallucination, then suddenly enforcing models like 'rape', 'shame', prostitution', ...are repressive 'ideas' from the paradigm of their parents, and UTTERLY confusing.
.
A Paradigm is Cultural SubReality
 |
Paradigm behavior is making supersense by your supersensor 'brain',
using all very sophisticated sense info,
and not following a computer fed by 'rational' logic 'rationally' applied on 'digital' satellite info.
Sense info is at least 1000 times more complex, and brains are 1000 times faster than computers. While using only a fraction of the energy consumed
by supercomputers.Thomas Kuhn: a paradigm cannot be reduced to a set of beliefs or to a list of rules
Paradigms are sets of behavior and only are simulated be bibles full of 'words'. They could as well be simulateds by sets of smells, of vibrations, of tastes, ... Researchers have to learn (=to make logic) by doing.
Accumulated LOCALLY on 'earth' this sense behavior makes a temporary 'movie of earth-life': a LOCAL paradigm (Common Sense Field).
The author Herbert Marcuse mid 20th century described in One Dimensional Man what happened to Western man when reduced to 'rational' logic (rules)
.
Cultures in Balance
Environment in every Paradigm (often called 'culture') is in balance around a local equilibrium.
Environment in every Paradigm (often called 'culture') is in balance around a local equilibrium.
Paradigms are similar to magnetic fields and strongly cohesive, even during temporary adventures 'outside' individuals of sick Paradigms (e.g. Roman Empire, Western World, Han China) still see reality from smaller Sense Fields and show sick behavior. The dual view on life of Aristotle caused a Total Paradigm Shift in only The Western World. Reinforced by Catholicism in the Council of Chalcedon. Dualism is in fight with seeing reality as The One, as practiced by Red Indians, Polynesians, Zoroastrians, Inuit,...
Two local paradigms, both presenting life 'at the same time', can be ESSENTIALLY different. And the result might be genocide (Red Indians, Zoroastrians, Polynesians, ...). The interpretation of Zoroastrian Paradigm as dualistic as seen from the dual Catholic Paradigm was a predictable major disaster.
All earth-behaviors are based on strongly related Common Sense, so even sick behavior (non-sense) can be expressed in common sense. Only, then it is suddenly recognized as sick (see: capitalism described as non-sense in common sense).
The shared common sense might be minimal: day-night rithm, or temperature window. After a disaster of some kind suddenly temperature might drop or increase. Then suddenly the beings in the dominant Common Sense Field might slowly into 'recession' and give room to new growth (a shift in evolution).
.
Paradigms of LifeParadigms of Life 'only' are variants of the HUGE 'experience' build during evolution. Variations in 'life' (DNA + common sense).
Quote Thomas H. Huxley: Science is nothing, but trained and organized common sense
Unlike teeny weeny 'sick' 'rational' logic using quite material 'local balance of "Super Common Sense"' instead of the IDEA 'power'.
1 example: in the western world 'rational' battle tactics center around the 'heavenly' (virtual) notion 'power', an Asian extreme fighting art like 'hapkido' centers around physical 'balance'.
The 'blackbox' behavior in a 'Paradigm' (strongly cohesive) was described by the 'thinker' Thomas Kuhn. In 'rational' words: a 'mental' block, a one-way of seeing, a filter to block unwanted perceptions, a prison of thought, invisible censorship, 'normality', prejudice. And inevitably ends in a paradigm shift. During a paradigm shift 'normality' is all at once recognized as (brain-)prison, and balance is refound.
When inhabitants (prisoners) of a paradigm treat those happily living outside prison as 'terrorists', and even agressively organize raids. Then 'rationally' you might say: "that is caused by conditioning in prison (their mental model with strict borders); but common sense inspires those 'terrorists' under attack to fight those agressive raiders from prison with all means because they bring MURDEROUS NON-SENSE.
|
'Rational' historians use the IDEA of 'CONTINUOUS development by accumulation'.
That way they project present paradigm in linear way in some past paradigm , and disregarding direction changes they inject 'flat' 'good-evil thinking' in paradigms based on multidimensional common sense.
The Roman Empire with good-evil 'power'-thinking annihilated the remains of Zoroastrianism in Egypt (seeing life as unity). The HUGE jump from Zoroastrian common sense BESIDES Catholic good-evil thinking to ONLY good-evil thinking was ignored. At a JUMP (paradigm shift) in history life does not progress seamlessly, the direction of change flips (2 different paradigms merge). Afterwards 'looking back' in linear way only has use within the merged paradigm |
| Rationals 'reason': the suggestion that truth is relative would have a dramatic impact on the most fundamental 'rational issues' like 'objectivity', 'knowledge', 'understanding'. Indeed, a basic rule in the prison 'rationality is that TRUE = Prison Rules. |
.
Ape Common Sense (Life = Ritual)
Ape common sense was best preserved in Zoroastrianism and Zen Buddhism.
Also a lot of quality common sense may be found in Tagalog Ethics, Aborigine Ethics, Inuit Ethics, on Iceland and in Black Africa and Red Indian South America.Slavery has many shapes. A son of a millionaire (billionaire) gives a watch of 10.000$ to some female pop-artist, to make this 'singing' female ape of subspecies 'human' cum on his birthday party.
A son of a brutal king gives a precious diamond to the parents of some wicked princess who voluntarily became headmistress of his harem of robbed peasant girls.
Fungi always were a minor threat to life on earth. Fungi are great stranglers and make room for new life. But also fungi easily become a nuisance by suffocating life. Evolution never worried much about fungi. Mostly some self created natural disaster created room without fungi.
Since the Nicomachean Ethics of Aristotle human life was more and more terrorized by the addictive the 'mental'-drug 'exploitation' (slavery, aristocracy, individual liberty, industrialism, capitalism, ...). During Western Enlightenment western apes seriously 'mentally' addicted to rationalism (protestants) even became the dominant shape of human life, and created their own subjungle The New World.
Starting from subjungles 'UK' and 'US' heavily with 'rationalism' addicted apes of subsubspecies 'protestant humans' as 'British Empire' and 'Worldpower US' gradually worldwide killed most of 'human' emotion ('human' life).
And in WWII dominant apes of 'protestant' tribe 'Lutheran' in Germany like a herd of zombies followed the mentally ill male ape "Hitler", who was financed by unscrupulous 'banker apes' from New York, London, Berlin and Paris.
| Common Sense Fields may in 'communication' act like very agressive. And 'communication' between 'conflicting' adjacent Common Sense Fields is sometimes VERY difficult, because of ages of 'indoctrination'. Then opininions are totally 'frozen'. For brilliant cabaret you only need to confront a with capitalist BEHAVIOR trained 'traditional' US human ape with a with communist BEHAVIOR reeducated traditional Chinese human ape. But also suddenly you learn in a heartwarming way that Obama is a pro terrorism nigger (angry behaving 'white' ape from US jungle) and that The Dalai Lama is a dangerous terrorist ('friendly' smiling 'communist' ape from jungle "China") |
.
Conceptual Schemes modellize common sense ritual behavior (local intuition) ,
and are meant for training and not for 'hesitation' (some extra logic)
and are meant for training and not for 'hesitation' (some extra logic)
Of course a 'conceptual scheme' of the common sense behind local behavior seems abacadabra to members of other paradigms.
Local common sense exists inherently, and is not 'rational', and was not produced by evolution to create 'hesitation' or to educate 'rational' beings. Doing 'karate' with a manual in your hand is foolish.
But a scheme of this common sense might be a useful tool.
So the following 'rational' claim is circular 'reasoning', and just non-sense: the whole idea of a 'conceptual scheme' fails to explain anything [rationally] and should be abandoned
Languages can be mutually untranslatable, but there always is a third intermediary language.
Understanding' is a tricky religion, and leads to awfully arrogant absolute statements.
The rational statement: We can't [rationally] make sense of the idea that different conceptual schemes ['rational' ideas] exist.
Makes no sense outside the 'rational paradigm' (a 'closed' subparadigm of common sense).
And is simular to: behavior = TRUE or FALSE (good or evil)
Evolution overgrows parallel growing fungi with CHANGE.
Paradigm ShiftReality is a unity, dividing reality in aspects is a hobby of 'rational' 'science'.
A paradigm in local reality doesn't shift because it is 'wrong', but because change is getting close to zero (crisis)
Working with an in units divided reality is practical but also totally confusing.
'Scientific knowledge' grows by new 'scientific paradigms' of tiny aspects of reality replacing old ones.
Reality is mch more than accumulation of 'scientific paradigms', and locally is one paradigm (don't confuse 'paradigm' with 'conceptual scheme').
'Science' proceeds by seeing a 'scientific reality' as happy accumulation of 'scientific paradigms', presuming 'continuity', basics are modified but are never invalidated at the very root.
Life is much more than 'science', and in rare occasions some basics are changed at the root. The sublife 'rational life' proved very limited, with failing basics. So the succesful parts of 'rationality' are happily accepted, and the unsuccessful basics (like 'continuity') happily thrown away.
We'll never reach the 'right' paradigm. There will allways be change. The notions 'right' and 'better' and 'closer to the truth' are 'rational' and also very arrogant.
A paradigm doesn't shift because it is 'wrong', but because change is getting close to zero (crisis).
.
Sense Fields(variants of common sense, but sometimes dreams, and even nightmares)
Behavior of any 'living' being in a Common Sense Field is the accumulation of accumulated rituals. This was what 'progressive' US citizen Thomas Kuhn posed in his writings about paradigms, only thomas kuhn saw 'science' as the accumulation of total knowledge. Kuhn forgot that 'science' itself is the accumulation of accumulated 'western' rituals. Only a limited set of Roman Christian rituals.
Accumulated absolute knowledge is what the 'conservative' US-citizen Donald Davidson in the (dual) tradition of Immanuel Kant pointed at with 'conceptual schemes'.
That shows that life is awfully complex. Beings feel 'free', but behave within Common Sense Fields. And easily go from optimizing conservative rituals, via absolute rituals, to superiority rituals (= self worship = ego-ism = total rigidity = fascism)
Human animals of type female very well are aquainted with living in a hostile Common Sense Field: playing humble, playing pretty; playing nice; missionary sex;....
Replacing Freedom of The Human Family with MY Individual Freedom (liberty; individual enterprise; egoism) may accumulate in something like western democracy (absolutism disguised), and might result in ferocious Sense wars (wars on terrorism) between a Field of Recession (weakening, fragile and showing conservative spasms = recession) and strengthening beautiful Human Animal Common Sense Fields (using flexible common sense).
Evolution 'solved' getting in strangling conflicts with an archive of successful behavior in DNA and in the research phase of DNA (common sense behavior). DNA and common sense are culturally relative and prevent that Sense wars end in total destruction. Fine example: 'European' Australians realizing that they completely mistreated Aborigine culture. And the Canadian Goverment making excuses to the Red Indian population, about years of mistreatment.
Total rigidity also means 'cultural blindness', only in rigid superiority way sensing a virtual world (fine example: The United States Empire).
Dreaming 'freedom' fundamentals fight an Axis of Evil full of terrorism. Practicing Freedom of Speech in Wars on Terrorism 'fundamentals' forget about common sense.
You might find sense forces here though, that are quite positive to change (Zoroastrianism ..., Buddhism, ...).
In Canada, California, Belgium, Ireland, Malta, ... I see hopeful sparkles of common sense. But essential change will come from TOTALLY OUTSIDE the dominant Western World. Places like Philippines, Ethiopia, Nigeria, Iran, Malaysia, Thailand, Tanzania, Nepal, Pakistan, Bangladesh, Egypt, ..
With as creative and VERY powerful motor the area Iran, eastern Iraq, Pakistan and Northern India (areas with strong and colorfull Zoroastrian traditions)
A seemingly negative aspect of 'nature' is that it is very 'patient'. So it takes being decades in the midst of a devastating 'Wars on Terrorism' before common sense starts resisting. When water resources (base of earth-life) become threatened.
The variant of 'life' as settled on earth is based on water. All beings on earth (plants and animals) are largely water.
Without clean water, no life
After essential change got started, 'things' happen like a landslide.
In the Western culture in defense seen as unpredictable 'recession', elsewhere with creativity and intelligence seen as predictably bumpy 'road to freedom'
.
Local Truths = Local Common Sense Fields
Conceptual Schemes
|
In the past in evolution on Planet Earth rigid cultures just disappeared. Both human-mammal cultures as wel as other animal or plant cultures.
Such cultures had killed environment, or had got stuck in hallucinations.
Ice-ages, meteorites, supervolcano's ... and recessions just make room. 'Conceptual scheme' is a 'rational' notion related to an EXPERIMENT (concept) that points at Common Sense Field behavior fitting within the constraints of that experiment. And used in the way of David Davidson this 'rational' notion 'conceptual scheme' points at a set filled with 'rational' behavior. That's like: a fungus claiming that it's a healthy fungus. In "On the Very Idea of a Conceptual Scheme" (about Common Sense Fields) the mammal-human Davidson (no offense) uses the 'rational' sense behavior 'understanding' (= Western conceptual scheme) to deny the evolutional conceptual scheme 'common sense' that every living entity sees reality using a cultural 'scheme' (some subset of common sense) but nevertheless in own way. Davidson got stuck in 'rational spasm', and was able only to make 'rational' moves. Davidson 'rationally' 'stutters' 'your tree is my tree', is the tree of a bird, of a bee, it is a tree with ... 'rational' properties (as if 'trees' grow using the same 'rational' spasm). 'Rational' speech IS interpreted in common sense, but is not a common sense scheme, and causes utter confusion. A human like a fly caught in sticky 'catholic' superiority illusion that insect, bats, spiders, etcetera, live in 'rational' worlds. Donald Davidson believed that all beings sensed reality in 'rational' way ('rationality' as common sense and as The Law of Nature) . Davidson concludes that all variants of space-life are 'rational' 'Sense Fields of life'. And that every pair of Common Sense Fields of life has a kind of "Stone of Rosetta" transfer-table. In fact with the Stone of Rosetta 'table' the complex common sense Egyptian culture was made into a simple 'understandable' 'catholic' variant.
The Western mammal Donald Davidson with structured 'rational' noises like a wizard in 'rational' trance moves in the Common Sense Field 'reason' (Enlightenment Common Sense behavior 'understanding). 'Selling' the ritual behavior 'understanding' as a 'virtual scheme of reality in his brain' ( when bees 'see' a flower they do some 'bee common sense' rituals). Davidson sees himself as smarter than bees and looks in ritual 'superiority' way (understanding). In mode 'superiority' Western World mammals of race human like Davidson obviously value 'the rational scheme' as being 'higher' than intuition. Western World humans addicted with 'rationalism' practice beautiful 'rational' rituals, but also react like killer bees (war on terrorism) when meeting common sense warlords.
'Rational world views' practiced by western human animals
are much the same (always dual = conflict supposing). The Western ethics 'rationality' per definition has as basis that the world is based on 'rational laws and that way denies that 2 world views can be essentially different (Kuhn's incommensurability). Inherently the Western mammal-human called Davidson claims: in 'rational' trips' one sees TRUTH (natural law). |
.
Different Truths (Schemes) are very well Possible
Denial of position of Davidson that there is only 1 conceptual scheme, but worldwide Common Sense is much the same
Denial of position of Davidson that there is only 1 conceptual scheme, but worldwide Common Sense is much the same
| Most frequent question, related to the notion 'paradigm' of Thomas Kuhn: 0 Are different conceptual schemes possible, i.e. do different truths or incommensurable paradigms exist? |
The obvious elements of our everyday Western conceptual scheme include Enlightenmenment views about time and space, IF-THEN memory, local language, and so on. Sharing 'conceptual schemes' means living much of the same 'dream'. All schemes on earth are based on millions of years common sense, very much simular with stubborn minor differences
The Western Catholic Truth (away from common sense)
The ROMAN Christian world was built on the paradigm idea immaterial 'spirits' use bodies as housing, because that allowed superior humans (Romans) to keep other humans as slaves. Alien 'pagans' were supposed to be 'empty bodies' [slaves = houses of flesh], without the 'spirit' of superior humans). Confusing is that Mohammed envied Romans having slaves and he created 'Mohammedanism' with his 'Koran'. And Mohammed and his wives started keeping 'houses of flesh' (slaves).
Ages later during Catholic 'Enlightenment' in Europe the fundamental protestant Immanuel Kant posed: Uniform for evolution is that immaterial 'spirit' rules physical body.
BUT according to Henk Tuten: All common sense beliefs consider medidating (trance) as bodily BEHAVIOR and consequently consider slavery (spiritual behavior) as non-sense and both slaves and slave-bosses as human animals (body =soul). This very well possible scheme (evolution; behavior follows outcome of all senses) was ignored in the Western World, because since Enlightenment Western people arrogantly started to believe that 'divine spirit' (the Roman Catholic idea 'pure reason') created human culture.
Western cultures see 'language' in a shortsighted way. Western character based languages without a stable word base invite abstract thinking and finally fascism.
| Essentially different languages split original Islamic ethics and Roman Christian ethics. In fact Osama bin Laden mentioned as a basic problem: Unlike in the Muslim World in the Christian world politics and religion are split. Mind that only Roman Christian, Muhammedan and Hindu Worlds in 'top' circles split reality in spiritual heaven and sinful hell. Instead of recognizing life as ONE (an eternal flame). During a few ages out of many BILLIONS. |
Being 'perpendicular ' or without any relation is a notion from mathematical logic (total denial). In the logic discipline 'Formal Languages' such being in different world of logic is treated. In my opinion general philosophy could speed up quite a bit by looking more at mathematical logic.
Of course the imagination 'spirits from heaven' can be denied, already Wittgenstein in his Tractatus said: ANY statement can be denied.
Two absolute worlds are equal if their angle of relativity (in all sense logics) is zero. Two different absolute worlds are relative if their angle of relativity is not perpendicular.
Translation is still possible, but might take effort
.
Davidson and Conceptual Schemes
explaining Donald Davidson's on the very nature of a conceptual scheme
explaining Donald Davidson's on the very nature of a conceptual scheme
The American philosopher Donald Davidson (1917-2003) was the last in line of influential 'thinkers of rationality' (Rene Descartes, Immanuel Kant, Karl Popper. Defenders of The Dogma of Rationalism).Davidson became one of the 'hero's' after World War II in US-analytic philosophy.
Henk Tuten: I found on internet this interesting quote: He has been called the most important philosopher in the world by Richard Rorty among others. There is accuracy here, but it is a little like being called the most important opera singer in Arkansas.
Davidson (quite Catholic/Protestant) argued that inphysical 'analysis' causes physical human behavior (the discussion appearence versus reality). Davidson argues that the idea of a conceptual scheme is confused and that there can't be different conceptual schemes, and thus that the concept has no use.
In fact Davidson suggest that IF the behavior described by a sentence of English language is TRUE, then this behavior is TRUE everywhere on earth. Said in another way: if some behavior 'scientifically' is determined as FALSE or EVIL in the US, THEN this behavior is EVIL or TERROR everywhere on earth. That's why FBI,CIA and US-governments invented War on Terrorism. Quite 'rational' Davidson denies the relativism behind paradigms and just like Aristotle trusts IDEAS as absolute substitute for behavior.
| In an interview Davidson says: We recognize all the
differences against a shared background: everyone knows there is a
common space and time in which other people (and lots of other things)
exist, and we all know that some other people have minds much like
our own. And so forth Henk Tuten: The 'shared background' is earth-common-sense. But within earth-common-sense there are HUGE differences in major 'paradigms'. Like we all know = arrogance. 'space' = reality; 'time' = a 'rational' 'idea'. The notion 'idea' presumes 'mind', and 'mind' presumes a mind-body-split. So the wizard Davidson only acts ritual in 'rational' way. |
Davidson attacks in 'Davidson's Razor' what he calls The third dogma of Empiricism:
This second dualism of scheme, of organizing system and something waiting to be organized,
cannot be made intelligible and defensible. It is itself a dogma of empiricism.
Partly wise, indeed a paradigm in reality is not waiting to be organized. Partly 'rational' non-sense,
a paradigm cannot be expressed in words, but description is a good tool
to get grip on the paradigm. Davidson denied that there is any other kind of description besides the literally false one. This way he divided 'material reality'and 'mind reality to distinct domains (dualism).
'Idea' is a synonym for 'Form'; 'Forms' and 'ideas' are 'simulations. Paradigms are being simulated. Davidson's dual view on reality is almost unbelievable: a statement = TRUE (when 'rational' good) or FALSE (when 'rationally' evil or 'irrational'). Of course Davidson rejected conceptual relativism, i.e., the idea that the behavior of human cultures follows local conditions.
.
Davidson Profile (end)
conceptual schemes survived Davidson's attack
conceptual schemes survived Davidson's attack
Davidson taught at Stanford, Princeton, Chicago, Berkeley, ... Davidsson used the "principle of charity" for language and introduced the notion "anomalous monism".
The Principle of Charity: interpreting statements as 'rational'. It forces the interpreter to maximize the truth (= rationality) in the statement. The goal of this principle is to avoid 'irrationality' (seen as FALSE).
Anomalous Monism is the dream of the relationship between mind and body. In a nutshell: body follows 'mind', but 'mind' is not physical (mental anomalism).
The source of fascism. Indeed, since the sixties in top The US in accelerating speed became fascist.
These influential human animals can be characterized as 'Dreamers' (Analyzers). 'Dreamers' ever more arrogantly (superior) dominate the period between start of Enlightenment and begin 21st century. Davidson's western human mammal 'analysis', presented in a series of essays starting 1960, became flags. Directing the western human mammals away from 'down to earth' common sense behavior towards analytical 'rational' behavior directed by 'thinking' (like dominant 'rational' urine on the bark of the dying human 'philosophy' tree in a common sense jungle).
Flags of importance for Davidson were the writings of W.V.O.Quine, C.I. Lewis, Frank Ramsey and Immanuel Kant.
Henk Tuten: Davidson did not 'smell' the fascist tendencies in the work of Kant.
Anyway, Davidson completely had suppressed the sense that he needed to 'touch' the 'relativism' in the work of the later Ludwig Wittgenstein about language.
Though he was more 'invisible', Donald Davidson even more than Karl Popper might be seen as superhero of 'rationality'.
Davidson with clouds of complex words chased away the threat of the relativism of the in non-American eyes only really important American philosopher Thomas Kuhn.
For Donald Davidson Kuhn's relativism was 'irrationalism' and thus FALSE.
In the roaring sixties in America 'irrationalism' was by 'the establishment' seen as simular to terrorism and threatening for
law and order. And often violently with ALL means (including murder) these 'threats' were suppressed.
Thomas Kuhn was lucky to be a famous professor, and very wise to stay almost 'invisible'.
.
The 'rational' scheme 'Understanding' (1)
Understanding is a tough myth, dating from Enlightenment and already many ages before invented by the ancient Hellenist Greek biologer Aristotle. 'Understanding' is a scheme for the logic 'rationality' that filters multimensional common sense to only 'rational' observations. No more the common sense 'what you sense is all you get' (wysywig), but the 'rational' 'what you 'spiritualize' (brain-addiction) is the heaven for thinking' (wyshfothink).
In the 20th century Donald Davidson adds his part of confusion with his 'rational' claim: We can investigate the world, and man as a part of it, and thus find out what [rational] cues he could have of what [rationally] goes on around him. Subtracting his [rational] cues from his [rational] world view, we get men's net [rational] contribution as the [rational] difference. This [rational] difference marks the extent of men's sovereignty--the domain with which he can revise [rational] theory while saving THE [rational] data.
'Understanding' is, since Enlightenment, presented as a metaphysical property, that everbody owns. But 'understanding' is just some tool, a logic used by the body to archive sense experience What works is working. A return from abstract dreaming to common sense will bring turbulant times. Wise people should not worry about things like social position, but use their talent in 'puzzling' to find a generally acceptable translation. One tip: the Buddhist way of using their 4 Noble Truths for Social Behavior, and rational thought for ONLY Technology worked perfectly.
In some 'rational' writings understanding is also referred to as 'capacity', something you own or not. You don't have the 'capacity' to speak Chinese, after 10 years of training you're just starting to get 'the feeling'. Similar to having the 'capacity' of a drinking glass.
A Kuhnian Paradigm Shift is producing a slight angle between 1 or more ethical values (sense experiences given value) in 'old' and 'new' paradigm (differences in HUGE common sense, not only the TINY differences in 'rational' values) . Even such 'maintenance shifts' proved to be shocking.
An Major Paradigm Shift produces HUGE differences in some basic BEHAVIOR.
.
The myth 'Understanding' (2): Being smart is not knowing 'theory but 'Creativity + Training'
'Understanding' does not exist. It's an IDEA, as is 'IQ'.
The behavior 'smart' means being quick in being-trained (quick in learning).
The myth 'understanding means being talented in memorizing and reciting 'formulas'.
To have 'formulas' ready for use is religious behaviour, and practical in a religious society. But nothing special.
To be fast in learning, since Enlightenment, is related to 'rational intelligence' ('understanding' = knowing 'theory').
But everybody knows that there are very clumsy professors, and quite practical carpenters.
Many professors are not quick in learning to use a screwdriver, but quick in repeating complex dreams (theories).
When fighting better not theorize about the next blow, but just react.
Education = Training the sensory motor, not memorizing theories.
Theories are great TOOLS in technology, but disastrous in social life
.
An Example of a Scheme
Davidson distinguishes organized experience (schemes), and experience waiting to be organized. Davidson warns for theories that place some third entity (fantasy) between such a scheme and language. Or use such a fantasy as filter of this scheme. He forgets that common sense language is part of reality. He in fact says: placing 'rationality' between the scheme 'common sense language' and 'reality'/sensory-experience is asking for trouble. Davidson wants to show that language = 'rational' scheme of 'the world', but without realizing inherently states that language is common sense scheme of 'the world', and 'rationality' is a superfluous scheme.
A perfect example of a scheme is rational thinking. or diminishing reality to 'rationally good' and 'rationally evil' (TRUE and FALSE). It illustrates that the thin 'rational' tops of early 21st century Western Cultures reduced common sense experience to 'TRUE rational experience' obeying scheme 'social science', and got very one-sided (prejudiced). Such 'rational' thinking made them dwell in tiny virtual worlds, far from reality
The inherent explanation of sensory experience in the logic 'rationality' is:
(A. the Roman Christian Mind-Body-Split; considering reality a dualism of we versus they) + (B. Views called a-priori of left brain thinker Immanuel Kant about space and time). Or the Aristotelian doctrine lend by the Romans that immaterial souls are imprisoned in physical bodies (the belief in 'flying' souls).
As far as I know in the 20th century beside Roman Christians only Muslims and followers of Krishnamurti (of the Hara Krishna sect) supported this we-they thinking. His writings are 'spiritual' (abstract or vague), but he argued that human brains are unfit to grasp reality as a whole). This thinking allows slavery, castes (Hinduism) and Jihads.
| WHY did the Romans do that?: Possibly unaware, but WITHOUT DOUBT because thinking in terms of 'sacred souls' and 'unclean bodies' tolerated the PRIME basic of Roman culture: .... slavery. |
Immanuel Kant much later in late Enlightenment created some very dense complex 'fog' in "Critique of Pure Reason" to introduce some 'humbug' a priori. Practically NOBODY in scientific circles wanted to admit that he/she got completely lost in the tricky fog of Kant's fantasies. But it was quite convenient, that Immanuel Kant obviously tolerated the Roman inheritance consisting of slavery, suppression of women, capitalism, industrialism (extreme engineering), power politics and 'rule of THE people' (democracy). So his curious and at his time already 2 ages old (!) Christian New Science ideas about space and time were accepted. In fact again ages later Albert Einstein was reluctantly permitted to make only a minor adaption.
Ideas of early 17th century (the Age of Absolutism) rule our 21st century world! You might have a look at how many models a thinker like Karl Popper used to filter sense experience.
That's why the Roman Christian church tolerated its fundamental Protestant branch to INVENT 'apartheid' and slavery of 'black human animals with little soul'. And why the Mathematical logic 'Rationalism' of the Catholic priest Rene Descartes effortlessly adapted in 'protestantism' to War on Terrorism.
Tolerating brutal murdering (rational violence) of ignorant peaceful people, with use of: Starfighters, Crusaders, Stratofortresses, Thunderstreaks, ThunderChiefs, VooDoos, Hustlers, Delta Daggers, Buccaneers, Phantoms, Blackbirds, Hawker Harriers, Intruders, Dragon Ladies, Skyhawks, Lightnings, Tomcats, Eagles, Tigers, Thunderbolts, Falcons, Hawks, Ravens, Hornets, Tornados, NightHawks, Lancers, Tigersharks, Spirits, Super Hornets, Raptors, Joint Strike Fighters
| Chinese language describes a 'fighterplane' as 'war machine'. 'Bomber' as to the point imagination: 'noisy machine that fries people alife'. |
.
Continuity or Time
As already said:Davidson (inherently) warns for theories that place some extra scheme (fantasy) between common sense language and reality. Like the Hellenistic Greek Aristotle with his 'Nicomachean Ethics, or Immanuel Kant with his pure reason, or Karl Popper with falsification. Davidson wants to show that sense language = representation in 'common sense' logic of sense experience. So Davidson claims that 'logic about logic' (meta-logic ='spirituality') is only deviating from common sense, and nothing but creating TOTAL confusion.
Such a fantasy is 'continuity', inherently introduced by Descartes. The concept 'time' since Enlightenment totally distorted Western view on life. And these views since the ancient Greek 'Aristotle' already were heavily distorted by 'egoism'.
With result that in the Western World sensing the energy state 'history' started fading.
Now especially the concepts 'linearity' and 'continuity' were like heroin.
'Time' is perfect in skill to judge 'wear', but inadequate in social life. A 'jump' has no 'duration' 'length' or 'distance'.
The concept 'continuity' together with 'egoism' allows the 'compromising' that via the energy state 'fascism' end in 'history'.
A more 'common sense' view is considering social life as a camera with energy states (history, now).
'History'=The Other Side=Pause=low energy states,stable; 'now'=play, execution.
Then between (all of) 'history'=pause and 'now'=play are only energy jumps.
In 'rational' view 'paranormal' people can retrieve movies from a camera in pause
Like retrieving a corrupted sense movie from a broken sense camera (or related sense camera's).
And that way making a playback of energy sense experiences in 'history', while being in 'now'.
That is like sensing someone's recent high energy history as if being there, and quite weird in 'rational' opinion.
Until now very rarely western people have the talent to combine 'pause' and 'play'
That way such hoovering 'prophets' play the movie 'History' while still acting in the tophit movie 'Now'.
Such 'superwizards' realize that only 1 tweuron 'divides' pause and play.
It helps to consider a living humanoid body as as camera (brain integrated with body) storing pics in archive . With a lot of local intelligence (motors), and always 'on' but with 2 energy states (pause, play). The brain is like a 3 dimensional memorycard +CPU.
Every pic takes a certain amount of energy shots of size 'tweuron' (see brain). Losing pics from memory or CPU happens frequently.
The camera stops functioning (braindeath=stop of 'play') when either the memory or CPU gets too much corrupted.
A 'paradigm shift' is a growth spasm, an irreversible chain of fresh pics. Life is filling the archive of a camera.
Realize that a meteorite of size 'moon' might be a ball of dung fired by space life to squash an irritating flie. And that for flies a human 'sink' is a black hole.
Elephants are relatively 'slow' and 'huge', invisible for Ant-cameras, nevertheless ant-life without elephants is a beautiful movie.
By other space life 'humans' might be seen as 'microbes' living on 'flies'. In that case surrounding space seems huge, because humans are miniscule.
A NASA microbe from Earth might pass hundreds of life shapes of size 'moon' who feel no need to screen space with microscopes.
.
Example 'Taliban'
Islam as way of life is much older than Mohammadanism. Mohammad is 'only' thought to be the final prophet. Although he was (praise on him) a quite agressive trader. Many Hebrew prophets are also Islamic prophets. And even some Hindu prophets.
In Islam and in its totally dominant variant Mohammedanism drugs are totally forbidden. So growing papaver for heroin like in Afghanistan is a crime in Mohammedan Law. Also gambling is not allowed. Likewise the lending of money on interest is forbidden as it tends to accumulate wealth within a narrow circle and that is considered harmful.
After the trader Muhammed took over control (imitating Roman Catholicism), Islam in practice devaluated to Muhammedan Islam. Mohammedanism became the surrogate Roman Christianity for Arabian people.
Like the Roman version of Christianity a Muhammedan Muslim believes in: One male god called 'Allah', his Angels, his Law Books and his Prophets. Life after Death.
The Quran of Mohammad stealthily evades the subject 'slavery'. BUT: Mohammad and his wives owned slaves and traded in them.
The Quran of Mohammad describes he who let his slave inherit as a person who is ungrateful to Allah.
The Quran teaches that a slave is not equal to a free man. In practice in fundamental Mohammedan countries women are treated as slaves.
Muhammadan doctrine has five aspects which confusingly became known as the five pillars of all of Islam:
Kalima ; To agree that Allah is 'great' and that Mohammad is His Messenger (absolutism).
Salat ; To say five daily prayers at their appointed times (Islam religion).
Fasting ; To observe fast during the month of Ramadhan (Islam religion) .
Zakat ; To contribute a certain percentage of wealth for charity (compromise).
Haj ; To go for pilgrimage to Mecca at least once in one's life-time if physically and financially possible (Islam religion).
Just like Catholicism in a stealthy way Muhammedanism tolerates and even stimulates slavery
Mohammadanism like Roman Christianity might be considered as a rigid religion around a dual view on life (following Aristotle).
Roman Christian Bible and Muhammedan Quran are more fundamentalist addictive books than the Red Booklet of Mao.
The prohibiting of using pictures of persons, of lending on interest and of using drugs shows common sense and that Islam is a tolerant belief and aims for the happiness of the whole community. Only that Islamic aim is corrupted by the Mohammadan rule 'Zakat'.
| In their paradigm the Taliban-leaders make their followers worship 'kalima', focus on religious aspects of Mohammedanism, allow growing papaver as long as most of the profit goes to them (zakat), and still see the way Mohammed treated women (slavery) as law. |
.
Example: The Conceptual Scheme of Chinese Qi
Qi or ch'i is one of the most tough and most essential of Chinese concepts.
Qi in common sense might be seen as sum of energy fields of a human body.
According to Zhuangzi, "There is but one qi under all heaven."
Zhuangzi specifies breath training: "A True Man's food is plain, but his breathing is unfathomable and tranquil. While the breathing of mass is through their throats, the breathing of True Man is through his heels." (fetus breathing = 'a hand-crossed and thumbs-jointed' posture of breathing = meditation position)
Ge Hong wrote: "When one is well cultivated in circulating qi, water will go upstream when one breathes out slowly; fire is extinguished when one breathes out slowly; ...
Zhuangzi: "Unify your attention. Rather than listen with the ear, listen with the heart. Rather than listen with the heart, listen with the qi.
According to Confucius, qi is the source of emotion = behavior. Then qi would be part of the 'sensory motor', an accumulated energyfield extending from the brain
Qi easily 'touches' seemingly far away objects.
The art of using Qi is becoming completely relaxed and let your intuition experience such 'touch' (behaving through the qi).
This is for instance practiced in the buddhist fighting art 'karate'. Emptying the brain (chemical memory-archive) and directly using sense experience. That is 'forgetting' about fear of death (tradition), and acting without 'breaks'.
Like 'karate' shows original behavior is 'forgetting about 'fear', and experiment with creative behavior.
.
Metaphysics = Superiority
For the third time: Davidson inherently warns for theories that place some third entity (fantasy) between common sense language and reality/sensory-experience. Like the Hellenistic Greek Aristotle with his Nicomachean Ethics, or Immanuel Kant with his pure reason, like rationality, or like Karl Popper with falsification. Davidson wants to show that sense language = representation in 'common sense' logic of sense experience. So Davidson (without realizing) claims that 'logic about logic' (meta-logic =metaphysics='spirituality') is only deviating from common sense, and nothing but creating TOTAL confusion
Metaphysics is totally abstract and needs no sense experiences. Metaphysics needs input, a scheme that transfers reality in 'metaphysical' notions.
Here things get fishy. Such a scheme has a hidden goal, is personal, based on prejudices and own experiences.
So between the reality and a 'metaphysician' are the major schemes: (1) the outer layer 'rationality; (2) the input layer.
A simple example:
A metaphysician might in his personal scheme (his personal language to make sense of reality) create the rule that sex with his secretary is part of his job. (Or a Mohammedan might claim that his wife is his property. ).
That rule is input for his abstract 'rational' layer.
His 'rational' layer translates this behavior in brilliant 'rational' notions like: ... a satisfying relation with an employee improves working relations, and as such productivity, or Allah is Great and Mohammed is my example
This confusing output is input for reactions of others.
That process is perfectly illustrated by American lawyers, who aiming at the 'rational' goal 'success' even without problem defend murderers of whom they are sure that they are guilty.
This is exacly how it works and how things can get totally weird (fascist)
OK, 1 more example. In New Orleans after hurricane Katrina common sense dictated: Help at all costs.
This resulted in heroic 'rational' sentences like: We'll do everything we can (while 'rationally' thinking: we're not gowing to throw our money in the Mississippi). And as fast as possible ('rationally' thinking: well, time heals all wounds). That resulted in continuing spending HUGE amounts of money on War on Terrorism.
After the 2004 tsunami The US promised Thailand at least 200 million dollar. 17 were really donated, ....by private funds.
Isolated in technology 'rational' logic works fine, WHEN used by people with mathematical training.Since 'rational' logic in the Western World was introduced in social science as replacement for common sense (under name 'sociology') during WW2 (by UK and US) in a couple of decades things went totally berserk.
.
Metaphysics
The word metaphysics is formed from the Greek meta ta phusika,
refferring to that collection of Aristotelean texts which since then goes by the name of the "Metaphysics".
Aristotle himself referred to that portion of philosophy as "the theological science"
(theologikê) and as "first philosophy" (prôtê philosophia), because it involved the consideration of God (structure of reality).Metaphysics is supposed to answer the question "What is reality?"
Metaphysics was understood to mean things like:
"the science of the world beyond nature", that is, the science of the immaterial.
"the science of mental phenomena and of the laws of mind"
the “science” that studied “being as such” or “the first causes of things” or “things that do not change.”
a theory of the essence of things, of the fundamental principles that organize the universe the things which we study after having mastered the sciences which deal with the physical world"
metaphysics attempts to tell what anything must be like in order to be at all.
Metaphysics is a circular activity
Either you admit to be physical part of reality, or you suppose a standpoint outside human made reality and the ability to judge or unravel reality. The trick is the introduction of 'the immaterial', stuff that doesn't follow physical laws like 'physical love'. Now ANYTHING is allowed (see picture: criminal mind). Nobody can metaphysically prevent that you believe that your wife is your physical property. To question physical laws is ok, but doing this by introducing 'creationism' is playing God.
Both are human made 'conceptual schemes' and as models are truths in themselves, and not made for debate.
.
The Roman Paradigm
Back in time:
During the Roman occupation of Judah locally there were 2 very dominant world views (paradigms): the Israelian Paradigm (the Pharisees) and the Roman Paradigm. Both based on the superiority thinking of the Hellenist Paradigm (superior masters and worthless slaves; dual thinking).
It helps to imagine paradigms as aquariums. Jesus, because of being educated outside those aquariums in Zoroastrian Egypt was able to act as a 'prophet' and to imagine being a 'fish' inside the local aquarium of an by Israel and Roman Empire occupied Juda and at the same time looking from outside at the aquarium.
That way Jesus could laugh about seemingly predictable behavior (rituals) in the aqarium. And Jesus could predict that one day the piranhas in the aquarium would rip him to pieces. And Jesus foresaw that the person who was most close to him might lead the piranhas towards him. Because such a person (Judas) could not help treating him as a beloved one (ritual love). That way the piranhas would find Jesus.
In 451 AC at the Council of Chalcedon the European Christian Churches deviant from the Middle East Christian Religions AGREED (conceptual scheme) to consider 'God' and his 'only' son Jesus as holy IMMATERIAL 'spirits'.
That way between reality/common sense and language the Catholic and Byzantine churches plus Israelian Hebrew 'christianity' ('Pharisee' Christianity forced by Alexander the 'Great') placed the 'mental-juggling' concept 'spirit'. Completely abstract (not only invisible, but even immaterial) and thus TOTALLY flexible to serve the purposes of those in power. Ages later the scheme 'spiritualism' was formalized in the scheme rationalism by the catholic priest Rene Descartes.
Since then in the Western World things got weirder and weirder. From exorcism, inquisition, witch-burnings, slavery, concentration camps, nuclear missiles, war on terrorism. Making a director of Rockefeller Oil Multinational Chevron responsible for Law and Order on earth (Minister of Foreign Affairs of the US). During a many hundreds of billions costing Iraq War that clearly is about the huge oil and gas reserves of Iraq. In a period of industrial global warming. ....People go to prison for much less.
Annihilating earth environment ....while considering itself as First World, and other human cultures as Third World or even Axis of Evil.
Donald Davidson was quoted in 2000
| What I was questioning was (1) the idea that we
can distinguish between an unconceptualized content given in
experience and an organizing scheme. [Henk Tuten: Osama bin Laden shows that his common sense emits that killing Muslim children wordwide through hunger doesn't feel OK] . (2) the idea of radically incommensurable basic views of the world. We recognize all the differences against a shared background: everyone knows there is a common space and time. [Henk Tuten: space and time are LOCAL Roman Christian Enlightenment concepts. And outside the Western World nobody shares the Aristotelian idea 'IMMATERIAL spirit']. The evolutionary shared background is archived in DNA (long term) and common sense (short term). Not in the European 'translation' 'understanding' (rationality) of the Aristotelian hallucination 'spirit'. A common sense Australian might say to a 'spiritual' American with high 'IQ': man you're talking shit |
.
Local Truths = Locally Normal Science
Davidson says: Something is a language, and associated with a conceptual scheme [i.e. a local truth], whether we can translate it or not, if it stands in a certain relation to experience (predicting, organizing, facing, or fitting).
In fact he says: something is a local truth if it relates to 'reality' through sensory experiences.
Thus, the CHALLENGE is to say what the relation is and be clearer about the entities related.
The difference of two logic schemes that are essentially different is found in two ways of explaining.
There is no real comparing, only trying to find out the different explanations for the same object or reaction.
Something is generally said to be an acceptable 'conceptual scheme' or local truth if the sensory entities fit some accepted logic.
Thus in the case of failure of translatability there clearly are different logics, maybe even incomparable senses. Here we have two different local truths.
| An extra complication of rationalism is that the prime basic 'the spirit God exists' is not related
to sensory experience, but is pure fantasy. This basic result is dividing reality in 2 parts: Abstract Laws of Nature (God) and Empirical Results of those Laws of Nature, that is in 'good' and 'evil'.
That results in discrimination like: smart/stupid, whites/blacks, heterosexuals/homosexuals, men/women, christians/pagans, slim/fat etcetera.
Realize that all second parts only exist when you IMAGINE the first half. You respect someone because of by behavior triggered moods, not because of abstract divisions. Another serious complication is that the 'Empiricism' restricts itself to 'rational' experience.So most experience is ignored. Realize that Natural Gods represent a logic found in total sense EXPERIENCE. Not abstract and only 'rational' at all. |
Just for the sake of being able of considering translatability as part of any language Davidson speaks about 'partial failure of translation'. In fact two different truths means TOTAL failure of translation.
Sense languages can only be translated into one another IF they share the same truth (a conceptual scheme like 'common sense'). A common sense interpretation uses evolutional ethics (= MANY MANY ages old proven intuition). Take care: part of 'common sense' is any communication system, like 'smell language'.
The Enlightenment myth 'understanding' in the Western World created the arrogant opinion that (Roman) 'Christian' humans are different from other humans, and that the human animal is not an animal. That resulted in considering 'Christian' humans as 'normal', and members of other paradigms as 'anormal', 'pagan', 'terrorist', ... Understanding is an abstract fantasy (concept), we humans just became quite consistent in sense reactions (WITHIN major cultures). ESPECIALLY (but not only) Israelian Hebrew culture and fundamentally Protestant cultures (like US, UK, Germany, The Netherlands etcetera) appear seriously infected by the 'Star Trek' like myth 'going where no-one went before' (being special). Of course that 'Star Trek' commanders don't interfere is an arrogant myth, but they don't send soldiers in 'dirty wars' to bring 'peace'.
Rational Myth: Novelties of fact or theory lead to the end of normal science
Theory IS rational research, so it only refreshes 'science from WITHIN. Leading to updated 'normal science'.
Incommensurability is not 'a novelty' in 'normality', it is for 'frozen research' what hot winds are for frozen forests. Defreezing of complex but boring 'normality=rigidity'=fascism to make room for beautiful 'para-normality=flexibility'=creativity.
.
Life and Space (1): Earth Life is not made in space
Roughly present humans might be divided in 2 major groups (only in our brains); the metaphysical realists (dominantly found in the Western World in circles of 'politicians', 'managers' and 'military leaders') and the physical realists (mainly found OUTSIDE The Western World).
Or expressed another way: The CONFLICT 'thinkers' and the COMMON sense DO'ers.
Physical realists see reality as function of the brain. That function is DNA and common sense as produced by 'evolution'.
Metaphysical realists (creationists) see reality as function of human 'a priori' (THE Truth).
THE Truth = Humans are a part of the creation of God from space.
This fantasy is responsible for all 'irrational', 'supernatural', and prejudicial beliefs in the world today. This arrogance of pretending being special (superiority) is the fatal flaw in Humanism. This belief is denying the HUGE behavioral archive 'common sense', and accepting the 'supernatural' and 'the metaphysical world'. Humanism is 'rational', but that is also exactly the fatal flaw. The teeny weeny and very young logic 'Rationalism' arrogantly denies HUGE and billions of years old common sense
In 'rational' judgment a belief like Zoroastrianism (base of both ORIGINAL Christianity and Buddhism) is 'dualistic'. But it is the dualistic good-evil view in 'rationalism' that makes us 'think' so. 'Rationality' finds finds insufficient 'rational' evidence for belief in the existence of irrationality The 'rational' view makes us fail to see that there are quite different views of the world, much more common sense
Is it a natural human desire to feel we are a part of something greater than ourselves. Bullshit!
'Rationalists' can only accept 'rational' IDEAS, and consider everything else as 'irrational' or FALSE. Life is about learning common sense (bigger than 'rationality, and multi-dimensional) and TRAINING the next generation
Between physical reality and THE Truth there is no fixed relation, because THE Truth is local fantasy.
Between physical reality in situation 1 and physical reality in situation 2 there is ALWAYS a TRANSLATION (a third language).
Physical reality 1 and 2 are part of Total Reality (The One).
.
Life and Space (2): Earth Life is one of many Space lifes
Space travel could make us meet beings that we can't yet make sense of (they for instance cut a unity in our ethics into two or more pieces (they might split 'speed' in 'good speed' and 'bad speed'), or 'see' a unity where we 'see' a dual pair. But we can have 'moods' about such for us 'invisible' creatures (called intuition).
Davidson writes: Kuhn . . . wants us to think of different observers of the same world who come to it with incommensurable systems of concepts. According to Davidson, Kuhn suggests . . . a dualism of total scheme (or language) and uninterpreted content.
Henkt Thomas Kuhn sees 'life' as made by 'schemes'. There's no reason at all to see two sense-langages as dual interpretations of reality, they are only differing logics interpreting a local reality. The duality that Davidsons means to observe is inherent in 'rationality' (sorry)
In case of perpendicularity of parts of schemes, taking a 'dual pair as a 'unity' is a way out. To keep it simple:
STATEMENT in language 1: "puritanism is good, relativism is terrorism" (US, Taliban, fundamentalism, Karl Popper adepts)
STATEMENT in language 2: "puritanism is evil, relativism is good" (enlightened absolutism, Thomas Kuhn adepts).
Clearly in language duo (1,2) puritanism and relativism the values 'good' and 'evil' are 'perpendicular' in operation 'relation' in 'rationality'.
The way out: A common sense language 3 taking the pair (good, evil) as value, with operation 'fit' in common sense. The statements 'a particular puritanism' = good and 'a particular relativism' = good (absolute operation: 'is equal to') now take common sense DECISIONS (lessons from 'life') to become statement: 'this particular relativism' fits common sense more' 'that particular puritanism' or 'this particular relativism' 'fits common sense less' than 'that particular puritanism'. (like in Zen Buddhism, Zoroastrianism, Red Indian culture, Aboriginal culture, Polynesian culture, ...). Language 1 and 2 are absolute and perpendicular (total failure of translation).
The semi-continuously making and updating of the multi-dimensional 'common sense' is called 'life'.
The chinese words translated as 'good' and 'bad' point to behavior or physical properties. 'clean'='good', 'dirty'='bad'. Nothing 'spiritual', Chinese can function as language 3.
In quantum-theory you have particles described by for instance 75% of time equal to value A in language 1 and 25% equal to value B in language 2.
What if in a third language 3 language 1 makes sense and not language 2?
This situation resembles schizophrenia were someone part of the time in his/her culture is in an unknown world.
Then in the third language 3 25% of time that person speaks non-sense (possibly consistent)..
Paradigms and Language
An IMMENSELY frustrating aspect of partly perpendicular paradigms is what Thomas Kuhn called 'incommensurability'. Then people talk in some aspects completely 'perpendicular' (or what is inherent in the notion 'paradigm': 'parallel'; both meaning making no sense to the other).
Their languages are in such cases FAR apart, and maybe too fuzzy.
The western ethics 'Rationality' results in great skill, but social contacts are not aboout skill but about emotion. Then cultural frenzy (emotion in paralysis) easily results in wars on terrorism, or fascism.
| Incommensurability follows The Principle of Common Sense (which is close to Planck's Principle): A new view on life accepts it's in-curable opponents, it integrates the succesful parts of opposing views and aims at educating a new generation with an adapted common sense. The Common Sense Principle (also Planck's Principle) contradicts the view forwarded by Karl Popper known as Popper's Principle. Popper believed in a kind of handicap-debate, in which opponents of 'rational' views should nevertheless use 'rational' arguments. That was like women fighting for equal respect while having to use male-superiority arguments. Such 'mirror-thinking' thinking resulted in the fascinating way of life 'femdom' (extreme feminism). A Western mirror-world with proud Divine Goddesses and humble male slaves (worms). More than only sexual, and (in a hidden way) with the love that is missing in the world 'rationally' dominated by men. |
Reasoning 'rationally' makes Western males (like being drugged) accept the death of millions of 'third world' people. And also makes common sense mothers EXTREMELY angry about 'rational' people accepting that their children are killed.
It makes that rational 'high society' defends the War in Iraq, while 'common sense citizens get 'sick' of this brutal behavior as results from the 'rational' 'Law of the Fittest'.
But 'rational worlds' are trio's (public,rational circus, owners). The local public is kept in control by a local 'rational circus', consisting of 'government', 'army', 'police', 'industry', 'justice' and 'science'. The purpose to The Owners of the circuses is to keep 'the masses' visiting the circus without getting anti owners.
In the example of 2011 Egypt: only a few generals (including Mubarak) are enough influential to be seen as The Owners. The Egyptian people is divided in anti and pro The Owners (symbolized by Mubarak). The outcome depends on if The Owners can keep The Circus in control.
One might conclude that language is crucial in contact between inhabitants of different paradigms. Keeping a base language very 'lean and mean' is clever, with an additional language of new words.
This article is part of the seriesLeap away from the 'Western World' |
most pictures on the websites of Henk Tuten
