 |
|
| Science Forum Index » Logic Forum » Dialetheism and Schopenhauer... |
|
Page 1 of 1 |
|
| Author |
Message |
| Jeff Rubard... |
 Posted: Sat Oct 03, 2009 2:27 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 1, 7:28 pm, "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay... at (no spam) gmail.com>
wrote:
[quote:d4075f5a15]On Oct 1, 4:03 pm, Jeff Rubard <jeffrub... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Greg the Bunny requests:
"DIALETHEISM AND SCHOPENHAUER"
"Akshul": Artur Schopenhauer was one of the major philosophers of the
19th century, and his work is still relevant today *in the face* both
of increasing questions about the "logic of the image" and the
parameters of Germanic capitalism: as we explore the significance of
the history of *Deutsch* and its effect on the "world mind" - we come
to understand that The Unthought is not completely elided by the
correct application of "cultural-psychological" principles *a la*
Freudians (Who Knew What They Were Doing) and "political progress" of
the desirable kind - and the windmills of our mind fail to meet all
the standards of "logical stringency" *pace* the understanding of
Nietzsche-as-Kantian theoretician: but we already know that
'ultramodern philosophy' must needs "grasp" its own logical structure
{intentionally} and this means a careful explicitation of the
"homology" between the *modern classic* text of philosophy and an
*adequate logical framework* in sync with it.
The dialetheic logical framework - which articulates the
comprehensibility of a logic which does not let all inferences desired
from the standpoint of "extensibility" - i.e. the "matching" of a rich
proof-theoretical framework to a richly articulated model-theoretical
framework *sine* an understanding that this "bisimilarity" is the
product of a selectivity re: the inferences desired from a "practical
standpoint" - is necessary to reveal the sense in which
"...Schopenhauer was *right*" - that is to say the *discovery of tact
in reasoning* amongst the understanding that a "tempo" can be that of
a 'vehicle' designed not to "block the road of inquiry", to make it
possible for earlier inferences *licensed* by the
"conjuncture" [circumstances of genuine discovery requiring *some* but
not *all* truths to be revealed, on pain of un-scientificity] to not
occlude the *possibility* of further (compatible) truths not known to
be amenable to "logical interconnection" with the former *at the
present time*. Arnol'd rules.
Well, yes, the paraconsistent in the dialetheic allows that readily
and also it allows simple generalizations in the universal to apply
first.
It's except for one part, why it doesn't follow from the dialetheic.
It's implicit.
Neitszche as Kant, Freidrich Nietzsche as Immanuel Kant, leads to,
they both observe very similar perceived facts about the world. They
avoid it variously. Kant says "here's a complete structure of
everything and how it is" and Nietszsche says "Look! My god! Kant
has a complete structure of everything and how it is."
You're talking about an expression framework, elevator music.
Regards,
Ross F.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
[/quote:d4075f5a15]
YEAH! |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| Big Red Jeff Rubard... |
| Posted: Sat Oct 31, 2009 3:32 pm |
|
|
|
Guest
|
On Oct 3, 5:27 pm, Jeff Rubard <jeffrub... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
[quote]On Oct 1, 7:28 pm, "Ross A. Finlayson" <ross.finlay... at (no spam) gmail.com
wrote:
On Oct 1, 4:03 pm, JeffRubard<jeffrub... at (no spam) gmail.com> wrote:
Greg the Bunny requests:
"DIALETHEISM ANDSCHOPENHAUER"
"Akshul": ArturSchopenhauerwas one of the major philosophers of the
19th century, and his work is still relevant today *in the face* both
of increasing questions about the "logic of the image" and the
parameters of Germanic capitalism: as we explore the significance of
the history of *Deutsch* and its effect on the "world mind" - we come
to understand that The Unthought is not completely elided by the
correct application of "cultural-psychological" principles *a la*
Freudians (Who Knew What They Were Doing) and "political progress" of
the desirable kind - and the windmills of our mind fail to meet all
the standards of "logical stringency" *pace* the understanding of
Nietzsche-as-Kantian theoretician: but we already know that
'ultramodern philosophy' must needs "grasp" its own logical structure
{intentionally} and this means a careful explicitation of the
"homology" between the *modern classic* text of philosophy and an
*adequate logical framework* in sync with it.
The dialetheic logical framework - which articulates the
comprehensibility of a logic which does not let all inferences desired
from the standpoint of "extensibility" - i.e. the "matching" of a rich
proof-theoretical framework to a richly articulated model-theoretical
framework *sine* an understanding that this "bisimilarity" is the
product of a selectivity re: the inferences desired from a "practical
standpoint" - is necessary to reveal the sense in which
"...Schopenhauerwas *right*" - that is to say the *discovery of tact
in reasoning* amongst the understanding that a "tempo" can be that of
a 'vehicle' designed not to "block the road of inquiry", to make it
possible for earlier inferences *licensed* by the
"conjuncture" [circumstances of genuine discovery requiring *some* but
not *all* truths to be revealed, on pain of un-scientificity] to not
occlude the *possibility* of further (compatible) truths not known to
be amenable to "logical interconnection" with the former *at the
present time*. Arnol'd rules.
Well, yes, the paraconsistent in the dialetheic allows that readily
and also it allows simple generalizations in the universal to apply
first.
It's except for one part, why it doesn't follow from the dialetheic.
It's implicit.
Neitszche as Kant, Freidrich Nietzsche as Immanuel Kant, leads to,
they both observe very similar perceived facts about the world. They
avoid it variously. Kant says "here's a complete structure of
everything and how it is" and Nietszsche says "Look! My god! Kant
has a complete structure of everything and how it is."
You're talking about an expression framework, elevator music.
Regards,
Ross F.- Hide quoted text -
- Show quoted text -
YEAH!
[/quote]
*Finalmente*, sometimes *philosophy* eventuates from "logic" rather
than the latter being an excuse for the former wrecking your, um,
"steez" re: publical rationality. Perhaps it is *fair* to say that
Schopenhauer is not the logic of if-I-knew-it-was-going-to-be-this-
kind-of-party-I-obviously-wouldn't-be-here-since-we-are-taking-a-
chance-on-unthought-and-our-bourgeois-social-status, but something
like the philosophy of "American atheism": your New-York German (as
opposed to New York fandom) will tell you How Important it is to keep
*externale* surfaces bereft of "telltale harps", but really Artur's
thought was probably something more like "Cleanliness is next to
'Godliness', if you catch my drift. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
The time now is Mon Dec 14, 2009 11:28 pm
|
|