Evident Points, Hidden Points LO25270

From: Gavin Ritz (garritz@xtra.co.nz)
Date: 09/01/00

Replying to LO25266 --

Dear Winfried

KiWiDressler wrote:

> When I read statements like this I am compelled to answer them:

To be compelled is to be driven (so what is it specifically that compels you?)

> >your truth is anything you believe or choose it to be.
> Let's assume this is true. Then I am free not to choose it, making it
> false.

Only if you want to use the law of excluded middle and the law of

> If I am not free not to choose it, it is false from the beginning.

Again you are using the laws of non contradiction and the law of excluded
middle. Could it not be something in-between?

> In order to have any meaning, your proposition requires to be it's own
> exception.

This is now the law of identity. (meaning is what you give it that is now
motives). For example what is the purpose of an organization is it to do
what it does (produce itself) or feed the demands of its demander.
Exception is the name you choose to give it which in turn gives it

To answer your statements one needs to lift ones level of abstraction and
realize that variables can be bi-conditional and conditional on each
other, which lifts one a recursion level higher than the normal laws of
symbolic logic. I mentioned in earlier threads about how we Discriminate
on objects and are unable to see both the "Discriminant object" and
"continuos field" at the same time. It is like thinking vertically and
horizontally at the same time, we have complexity in both levels.

Normally the 3 laws of logic are referred to as common sense but
unfortunately the are only common non-sense at recursive higher levels of

> As a good democrat who believes that laws have to apply to those who
> create the laws, such inconsistency is unacceptable for me. Nor:
> >Truly, if you find the Buddha on the road kill him.
> "There with open mouth
> watching blossoms floating down
> this child is Buddha!"
> (Haiku by Otani Kubutsu, my translation)

The reason why I mentioned this is that everyone on this planet including
the great masters are locked into the finite space of mind (although
infinite within) even though Buddhism says one has to transcend the ego,
this in itself is an ideal and hence a motive and hence one finds oneself
back in the realm of motives and values. The laws of tension and
attraction I am afraid deem this to be so. Nature does what nature does
despite the "great ideals of the masters"

Religions after all are "great" ideals and hence motives, just look at the
values placed on religions notions by those who are in them. Will not some
die for those ideals.

Please do not use the law of non contradiction and think that therefore I
must be against religions. I am arguing a point of view here. Which is
critical to using systems thinking or cybernetics.

We place the same notions on our language, arts, creations, all these
things are "self referencing" and hence have identity which in turn we
place value on them and protect them because of the ideals.

have a nice weekend


Gavin Ritz <garritz@xtra.co.nz>

Learning-org -- Hosted by Rick Karash <Richard@Karash.com> Public Dialog on Learning Organizations -- <http://www.learning-org.com>

"Learning-org" and the format of our message identifiers (LO1234, etc.) are trademarks of Richard Karash.