- Joined
- Aug 1, 2024
- Messages
- 298
- Reaction score
- 443
- Awards
- 16
So I ran across a thesis a while back and wanted to hear some opinions on it, I think it does well enough for what it is, I’ll cite the source below along with the link, (edited as I see shortened URL’s are against the rules)
it goes over different schools of logic and the inherent flaws of trying to find contradictions where there are no true contradictions, the truth is the truth and any contradiction of truth is in itself truthful, religious people may think of it as “it is impossible to blaspheme God” philosophers and poets may write something that hints upon -
the water of the cosmos reflects the future, the waters below are a reflection of what was - and what we do now is what will be, and what will be has already passed, but only to return. Like Dharma/Karma only.. This more closely mimics the idea of Indra’s net in Hinduism and Buddhism.
This thesis puts it in a… very wordy but thorough understanding of the inherent fallacies of contributing meaning - as all human perceptions are flawed, as all is true. which is not dissimilar to the first book of the Corpus Hermeticum. This tries to break it down in a digestible way by over complicating it imo.. “it is what it is, and what it is, is simply a flawed perception to those that are willing to see” Is a better way to put it. But Wansing breaks it down in a way that the less philosophical minded and more hard nosed book learned scholar can comprehend.
Likewise Schopenhauer eluded to this, Aleister Crowley after him and as mentioned, it was a concept long before either of them, or “a dream within a dream” by Edgar Allen Poe. The musings and philosophy of Lao Tzu- ect
Any thoughts WF?
Surely someone may find atleast the abstract of the thesis interesting enough to give it a read and give some contemplation to it.
Wansing, H. One Heresy and One Orthodoxy: On Dialetheism, Dimathematism, and the Non-normativity of Logic. Erkenn 89, 181–205 (2024).
or pdf version
it goes over different schools of logic and the inherent flaws of trying to find contradictions where there are no true contradictions, the truth is the truth and any contradiction of truth is in itself truthful, religious people may think of it as “it is impossible to blaspheme God” philosophers and poets may write something that hints upon -
the water of the cosmos reflects the future, the waters below are a reflection of what was - and what we do now is what will be, and what will be has already passed, but only to return. Like Dharma/Karma only.. This more closely mimics the idea of Indra’s net in Hinduism and Buddhism.
This thesis puts it in a… very wordy but thorough understanding of the inherent fallacies of contributing meaning - as all human perceptions are flawed, as all is true. which is not dissimilar to the first book of the Corpus Hermeticum. This tries to break it down in a digestible way by over complicating it imo.. “it is what it is, and what it is, is simply a flawed perception to those that are willing to see” Is a better way to put it. But Wansing breaks it down in a way that the less philosophical minded and more hard nosed book learned scholar can comprehend.
Likewise Schopenhauer eluded to this, Aleister Crowley after him and as mentioned, it was a concept long before either of them, or “a dream within a dream” by Edgar Allen Poe. The musings and philosophy of Lao Tzu- ect
Any thoughts WF?
Surely someone may find atleast the abstract of the thesis interesting enough to give it a read and give some contemplation to it.
Wansing, H. One Heresy and One Orthodoxy: On Dialetheism, Dimathematism, and the Non-normativity of Logic. Erkenn 89, 181–205 (2024).
or pdf version
Last edited: