Philosophy Now Forum

Colin Leslie Dean is a philosopher addressing the meaningless nature of all phenomenon ranging from science, math, to psychology itself. The premise for this position of "meaninglessness", or an absence of "structure", is founded in "contradiction". All phenemonon are founded as contradictory on there own terms as well as "meaningless". This includes the "viewpoint" or "perspective".

This cancels itself out, however, thus proving all the below sciences, maths, psychologies, etc. exist as "meaningful" truth statements as "meaninglessness" effectively acts as a point of origin from which these dichotomies arise. Metaphorically this may be observed as 0d as a center point between the positive/thetical and the negative/antithetical aspects of the number line. The contradiction occurs because of "meaninglessness" effectively causing "meaningless" to cancel itself out, under its own nature into "meaning" where all phenomenon, exist as meaningful center-points to further phenomenon.

The division of one phenomenon, into a contradictory state sets up a foundation for the synthesis of phenomenon into further phenemonon resulting in a perpetual renewal.

All contradiction set up the grounds for a synthetic unity allowing the various sciences, mathes, psychologies, etc. to "progress" through a continual renewal which necessitates all phenomenon as having an inherent meaning.

Hence the continual negation of phenomenon, as "meaningless", inevitably results in an inherent "meaningfulness" of all perspectives as "meaninglessness" itself is strictly a projection of ego.


Contradiction in Species Classification:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... TS-DON.pdf
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... ARADOX.pdf

Contradiction in Evolution:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/bo ... ection.pdf

Contradiction in Godel's Work:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... GODEL5.pdf

Contradiction in Mathematics:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... MATICS.pdf

Contradiction in Aristotelian Logic:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... smbook.pdf

Meaninglessness of all Views:
http://gamahucherpress.yellowgum.com/wp ... ssible.pdf

You are tripping over the liar's paradox: "This sentence is meaningless".

You use the contradiction as evidence for the contra-positive, but you haven't really tackled the issue.
Have a look at para-consistent logics and dialetheism.

All meaning is subjective. The meaning is the intention of the subject who wrote the sentence.

Now if you draw the objective/subjective distinction (as is commonly understood).

"ALL is objectively meaningless. Nihilism is true.". The subject meant to convey the objective truth of nihilism.
This is a performative contradiction for the meaning of the sentence is the author's intent.

In doing so contradicting the notion of objective truth, but still leaving hope for subjective meaning.

Which leaves us with an interesting problem: What do you mean by "true"?

1. The nature of Dean's arguments, premised on the contradictory nature of logical systems to negate the system itself requires the logical axioms/framework to be divided into opposing phenomenon setting a foundation for "relations" where each of the phenomenon, the thesis and antithesis gain meaning as phenomenon in themselves from a derived tension.

Because this foundation requires a quantification and qualification through 2/dualism, the argument is inherently mathematical and logical. As each phenomenon is a simultaneous thesis or antithesis to other phenomenon, all contradictions are inherent to opposing thesis' or antithesis' when place into a state of super positioning where they are elements of a larger set of truths.

2. Dean never really proves a contradiction as the contradictory nature of logic/words requires a progressive series of definitions to occur for the contradiction to exist as a negation and hence "proven", thus there is no contradiction unless he shows all variations.

Logic is a continuum by nature, as well as a self referencing circularity, thus necessitating all language as having meaning considering it exists as a projection of the observer, as a point of origin which defines the psyche, and is symbolic in nature; thus necessitating language as existing through all phenomena where "being" itself is a dialogue through its symbolic nature where each phenomena effectively acts as an image.

3. Contradictions is a meaningless term, according to his framework, as the term itself is not only never defined except through an infinite regress, but any infinite progress necessitates it as a meaningful "word" thus all words as inherently meaningful.

1. If words set the foundation for meaning, and they are fundamentally meaningingless due to infinite regress, this infinite regress in itself necessitate a dualistic "progress" where all words have meaning.

2. This dichotomy between meaning and meaningless, with meaningless existing existing as a phenomena of "strucuture" or "order" in itself, necessitate meaningless as "void" be a statement of relation between one meaning and multiple meanings as meaningless not only cannot be observed in and of itself but effectively can only be observed through contradiction/dualism as a multiplicity of meanings.

3. The dark nature of spirituality stemming from "meaninglessness" effectively cancels itself out into meaning as meaningless results in the dualism of contradiction where the phenomenon have meaning in and of themselves.

"An icy cold grips my soul. I am past the point of pain. It's like a death deeper than truth. I am spinning in the vast darkness. It's inside of me. My conscious self shatter's under the dilating darkness."

From void, or darkness, as an absence of the light or warmth of reason comes reason.


4. All aristoltelian logic exists as a gradation of true logic, and as such is contradictory on it's own terms but points to a higher level of logic and exists as true if viewed as an extension of it.


5. The premise of "all is meaningless" is a projection of Dean's psyche, premised in a form of eroticism mirroring freudian atheistic values as well as a projection of his idolization of femininity and the inherent formless rational inherent within it, as evidenced by his work in erotic poetry and the understanding of the female psyche in his work "femme fatale" where the main archetype is a vampiric type femininity synonymous to an abyss.

The subjective angle in which the contradictions are observed and argued necessitate his argument as a projection of his own psyche.

Logik wrote: ↑Sat Jan 26, 2019 11:57 pm You are tripping over the liar's paradox: "This sentence is meaningless".

You use the contradiction as evidence for the contra-positive, but you haven't really tackled the issue.
Have a look at para-consistent logics and dialetheism.

All meaning is subjective. The meaning is the intention of the subject who wrote the sentence.

Now if you draw the objective/subjective distinction (as is commonly understood).

"ALL is objectively meaningless. Nihilism is true.". The subject meant to convey the objective truth of nihilism.
This is a performative contradiction for the meaning of the sentence is the author's intent.

In doing so contradicting the notion of objective truth, but still leaving hope for subjective meaning.

Which leaves us with an interesting problem: What do you mean by "true"?

The liars paradox observe a simultaneous thesis and antithesis, where the thesis exists a true and the antithesis (which is observed only through the thesis) is observed as a deficiency or gradation of the thesis, but as a gradation is "true as existing".

All objectivity is group agreed upon subjective states, where one is deemed as strictly subjective and individualistic is unified into a group symmetry where the agreement, or symmetry of multiple subjective states results in objectivity.

All statements are objective in the respect they are observed by multiple people or multiple aspects of the self (multiple degrees of the self existing as 1 self).

Continual synthesis through the hegelian dialectic allows for a perpetual meaning in all phenomenon as a renewal.

Examples of this can be observed in the renewal of the parents through the child.

1. The child carries genetic information across time, making it an ever present median.
2. The parent unify with society (work, social structure) and each other to maintain the child resulting in various degrees of synthesis.
3. Knowledge from the parents are carried through the child.

This constant renewal of the same phenomena, in the face of perpetual chaos, necessitate the phenomena as continually the same hence resulting in an ever present meaning reflecting a form of changelessness.

It can be applied in further grades with arguments, following a similar format as well as various other dualities such as the "Yin/Yang" of taoism producing a perpetual variation.

The hegelian synthesis, as observing a continual renewal of logic necessitates it as not limited to aristotelian logic, but effectively necessitating a movement past it.

The hegelian dialectic observes an inherent "triadic" nature to phenomena where all phenomena are a center point between extremes thus necessitating all phenomena as having grades of meaning, but meaningfull nonetheless, with any "gradation" in meaning effectively observed a state of being closest to unity.

This synthetic element of the hegelian dialect is not limited to Hegel alone, where each axiom is fundamentally a variation and yet extension of 1 axiom, but observed with the synthetic qualities of natural law through sexuality as well as the pythagorean triad, pierces triassic logic, the nature of "3" within many religious systems, etc.

Hence "synthesis", while observed through hegel, is a foundational nature to all logic in the respect it is an axiom of identity itself where "meaning" is synonymous to "joining".

The ad-infinitum nature of all regressives and progresses with logic effectively make them all center points.

1. The infinite continuum on one localized set of phenomenon effectively makes them a fragment of another continuum and existing as a point, relativistically, in themselves relative to the large phenomena, hence existing as both having form and no form dependent upon the point of observation.

2. In a separate respect, as a point in an infinite continuum, with the continuum always extending infinitely in both directions, the continuum as a point is always a center point of the continuum.

3. All points, as both meaningful and existing as centers, are continuous in themselves.

The meaningless of math, language, logic, etc. Is fundamentally justified through the munchausen trillema employed by the Buddhist logician nagarjuna.

The problem occurs:

1. The trillema must be applied to the trillema, where the trillema negates itself into a truth statement.

2. This truth statement necessitates all axioms as meaningful points of observation, linear definition, and circular self referencing.

3. All contradictions, as contradictions, must be applied to themselves resulting in truth statements. This dualism between the contradiction and the truth statement necessitate the contradiction as a state of opposing phenomena, with these phenomena having meaning as existing while simultaneously the contradiction is an approximation of a truth statement, hence existing as a gradation of truth by extension, but a truth nonetheless.

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 4:19 am The liars paradox observe a simultaneous thesis and antithesis, where the thesis exists a true and the antithesis (which is observed only through the thesis) is observed as a deficiency or gradation of the thesis, but as a gradation is "true as existing".

This thesis/antithesis is commonly referred to as uncertainty/entropy.
You are simply observing the flow of information. The discrepancy between expectation and reality as a result of uncertainty.

It is the very mechanism by which falsification works.

Watch this video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKA4w2O61Xo ) and observe how people make the common mistake all non-scientists make.

By ignoring any attempts at self-disconfirmation they continuously fall for confirmation bias.

Entropy/Information is the dualism on which physics is stuck at the moment.

Logik wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 8:13 am

Eodnhoj7 wrote: ↑Sun Jan 27, 2019 4:19 am The liars paradox observe a simultaneous thesis and antithesis, where the thesis exists a true and the antithesis (which is observed only through the thesis) is observed as a deficiency or gradation of the thesis, but as a gradation is "true as existing".

This thesis/antithesis is commonly referred to as uncertainty/entropy.
You are simply observing the flow of information. The discrepancy between expectation and reality as a result of uncertainty.

It is the very mechanism by which falsification works.

Watch this video ( https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vKA4w2O61Xo ) and observe how people make the common mistake all non-scientists make.

By ignoring any attempts at self-disconfirmation they continuously fall for confirmation bias.

Entropy/Information is the dualism on which physics is stuck at the moment.

The thesis antithesis observes entropy/negenrropty dualism mirror factions/multiplication of quantities.

This dualism, as well as other dualism, observes continuity as the foundation for not just reason but "being" where the opposing phenomenon are defined as continuum in themselves.

What we understand as truth in its axiomatic state breaks down to continuity; hence the rational and intuitive elements of geometric axioms as well as religious death/resurrection allegories provide a basis for not just self evidence but exist as extensions of self evidence because it represents continuuity.

The above works, represented by Dean, necessitate that "truth" in itself, is meaningless which effectively means it exists.

1. The premise of contradiction, argued by dean in all of his works, necessitates a form of atomism, remiscient of the Buddhist and western atomic theory while paradoxically resulting in a proxy version of the same aristotelianism he argues against.

This atomism necessitates a form of meaninglessness in itself where each atom results in a further atoms so on an so forth. Each atom, effectively results in a point.

2. The problem occurs in the respect that the atom remains an ever present constant of change where it is both composed of and composed of further atoms. The atom, or fundamentally "point space", exists as a synthesis of change and no change where the continual changing of the atom makes it effectively a constant. Because the atom always changes, it always existe as an atom through perpetual synthesis.

3. This atomism, which gives rise to the dualistic notion of contradiction that Dean borrows from eastern/western atomists, necessitates by default and inherent logic/reason/meaning in everything because it is the premise of "measurement" fundamentally. All atomism is premised in a dualism, all dualism exists as a state of multiplicity, this dualism and multiplicity necessitates a mathematical process of individuation as simultaneous multiplication/division.

4. This individuation, effectively requires a constant quantity and quality of 1 as a divisive act, where each phenomenon effectively is divided into a dualism by one act of separation. These two opposing phenomenon, as phenomenon in themselves hence theatrical in these regards, are separated by 1 as acting as a negative. What separates 1 and 1 as 2 fundamentally is -1. And this continuum sets up the foundation for the number line.

5. Simulateous the act of individuation, which results in the contradictory state dean argues, necessitates, the contradiction as a continuum hence necessitating an infinite regress equivalent to a quantitative negative number line while, as a "truth" statement (considering the contradiction itself must exist as a contradiction, or c = c making him dependent upon aristotelian logic), it always progresses as a positive "existing" value manifesting further contradictions as truth statements equivalent to the positive number line.

6. Considering all antithetical states can only be observed due to a thetical state, the thetical state is always greater and can be observed as the continuum itself.

Dean's Premise of all is Meaningless, dually necessitates "all as meaningful" where all phenomenon exist as center points for further phenomenon (abstract or physical).

This dualism in turn exists as a contradiction according to Dean's premises, however simultaneously observes a neutral state that is beyond "meaning" and "meaninglessness" thus allowing Dean's arguments to be rational, but contradictory on their own terms as an approximation. Hence they are simultaneously "meaningless" and "meaningful".

"All" is triadic in nature.