*****Why Paradox and Contradiction Should Serve as Rational Foundations
Posted: Wed Aug 13, 2025 4:06 am
If contradiction and paradox are observed as rational, rational by nature of being a percieved ratio of thesis and antithesis from which a structured negation and/or synthesis occurs, or by the gradation of truths by degree, and with these things a transformation of perception, then the nature of contradiction and paradox being inherently "illogical", which is generally the case in western thought, is less of a rational viewpoint and more of a value projection based upon an assumption of what conceptualization should be....and yet the evidence is ignored at the inevitability of paradox and contradiction within and through systems of thought at the detriment of accepting the obvious nature of truth.
By transformation of conception, by paradox/contradiction, reason becomes a fixed process where rational discourse is nothing other than the formation and dissolution of limits by which contextual truth is symbolically a "raft to cross the river of the psyche". Paradox is a means of change, transition and the embodiment of a multidimensional nature.
1. Contradiction implies opposition of distinct assertions, a seperation by conflict.
2. Paradox implies connection of distinct assertions, a unity of differences.
A paradox can be viewed as a means of gradation:
The statement of "I am a liar" observes that the person in question both tells the truth and lies. So how does that occur?
Within a given framework of identity, lets say the time and space of a week or several years, that identity has multiple expressions within the given space. Sometimes it is a liar. Sometimes it is a truthteller.
Within the given framework these things occur simultaneously and in grades, sometimes more truth than lies are told or vice versa. These can be observes at meta-identities, identities within identities. So where an identity in the time and space of a week may be "x and y", within the meta identity "x" may only occur in one time and space and "y" within another, all of which are part of the larger time and space of a week.
So identity as grades can be akin to a meta-identity, and identity within an identity.
Now on the other hand all dualisms result in gradation by degree of the dualism itself. Take for example the following dualistic symbolic chain:
1. T
2. F
3. (T,F)
4. T(T,F)
5. F(T,F)
6. (T,F)(T,F)
7. T((T,F)(T,F))
8. F((T,F)(T,F))
9. (T,F)((T,F)(T,F))
10. Unto infinity.
Any dualism, and paradox requires a dualism by degree of differing but isomorphic expressions, results in infinite gradation of said dualism.
So the liars paradox results in different grades of true and false. This can be evidenced by true may be more than false on one set of days, vice versa, or all truths are partial truths and all lies are partial lies.
There is also another complementary way of viewing paradox:
Two opposing or various states existing at once in quantum mechanics is called superpositioning. These states existing at once are effectively indistinct potentiality. When the superpositioned states are observed one of the potential states is localized according to the state of the observer.
Now a paradox is similar. It is multiple values at once. The paradox is indistinct in its present state. Now when the paradox is observed one or more of the following things happens, there a four dimensions to the paradox as 'superpositioned assertions':
1. The observer chooses one of the several potential values and makes distinctions from there. You will see this in everyday life where a paradox of "this is that" is observed and people naturally takes sides. The paradox becomes a mirror of the observer in this scenario.
2. The observer adds context to the paradox. Now in a general paradox there is no context but the paradox itself and this leads to multiple states coexisting at once. Now if a paradox is given further context, by the observer(s), then a distinct value occurs.
For example the paradox of "I am a liar" had multiple values coexisting that results in the indistinct state of the paradox itself.
Now if the context of "on wednesdays" so we have "I am a liar on wednesdays" then the paradox ceases and we have a clearer and more defined assertion.
3. If opposites cancel eachother out then the paradox becomes pure logical potentiality, a logical space by which values can be projected or assigned. In these respects the paradox is empty of meaning and yet this emptiness becomes of mirror to the observer. As such it is a point by which the observers attention is transformed. You will find this method quite frequently in zen Buddhism where two opposing points, under the paradox, are observed and the cancelation causes a space of potentiality by which the observer is looking into a metaphorical mirror.
4. The fourth context is that the paradox becomes a dialectical synthesis where opposites merge to produce a new context. Aspects of an antithesis refine a thesis into a new truth, aspects of a these refine an antithesis into a new truth.
The foundational nature of paradox is context.
Context determines how the paradox unfolds to the observer and determines if a paradox exists at all.
Under one context the paradox can lead to gradation, another superpositioned logical states subject to context application, another a mirror to the observer by nature of being empty and finally the nature of dialectical synthesis.
A paradox has dualistic qualities:
1. It is a means of gradation.
2. It is a means of superpositioning where said superpositioning having a four-fold nature:
2a. Reflections of observer's patterns of perception.
2b. Projection of context by the observer.
2c. A void as potentiality of further values by the observer.
2d. Dialectical synthesis.
By transformation of conception, by paradox/contradiction, reason becomes a fixed process where rational discourse is nothing other than the formation and dissolution of limits by which contextual truth is symbolically a "raft to cross the river of the psyche". Paradox is a means of change, transition and the embodiment of a multidimensional nature.
1. Contradiction implies opposition of distinct assertions, a seperation by conflict.
2. Paradox implies connection of distinct assertions, a unity of differences.
A paradox can be viewed as a means of gradation:
The statement of "I am a liar" observes that the person in question both tells the truth and lies. So how does that occur?
Within a given framework of identity, lets say the time and space of a week or several years, that identity has multiple expressions within the given space. Sometimes it is a liar. Sometimes it is a truthteller.
Within the given framework these things occur simultaneously and in grades, sometimes more truth than lies are told or vice versa. These can be observes at meta-identities, identities within identities. So where an identity in the time and space of a week may be "x and y", within the meta identity "x" may only occur in one time and space and "y" within another, all of which are part of the larger time and space of a week.
So identity as grades can be akin to a meta-identity, and identity within an identity.
Now on the other hand all dualisms result in gradation by degree of the dualism itself. Take for example the following dualistic symbolic chain:
1. T
2. F
3. (T,F)
4. T(T,F)
5. F(T,F)
6. (T,F)(T,F)
7. T((T,F)(T,F))
8. F((T,F)(T,F))
9. (T,F)((T,F)(T,F))
10. Unto infinity.
Any dualism, and paradox requires a dualism by degree of differing but isomorphic expressions, results in infinite gradation of said dualism.
So the liars paradox results in different grades of true and false. This can be evidenced by true may be more than false on one set of days, vice versa, or all truths are partial truths and all lies are partial lies.
There is also another complementary way of viewing paradox:
Two opposing or various states existing at once in quantum mechanics is called superpositioning. These states existing at once are effectively indistinct potentiality. When the superpositioned states are observed one of the potential states is localized according to the state of the observer.
Now a paradox is similar. It is multiple values at once. The paradox is indistinct in its present state. Now when the paradox is observed one or more of the following things happens, there a four dimensions to the paradox as 'superpositioned assertions':
1. The observer chooses one of the several potential values and makes distinctions from there. You will see this in everyday life where a paradox of "this is that" is observed and people naturally takes sides. The paradox becomes a mirror of the observer in this scenario.
2. The observer adds context to the paradox. Now in a general paradox there is no context but the paradox itself and this leads to multiple states coexisting at once. Now if a paradox is given further context, by the observer(s), then a distinct value occurs.
For example the paradox of "I am a liar" had multiple values coexisting that results in the indistinct state of the paradox itself.
Now if the context of "on wednesdays" so we have "I am a liar on wednesdays" then the paradox ceases and we have a clearer and more defined assertion.
3. If opposites cancel eachother out then the paradox becomes pure logical potentiality, a logical space by which values can be projected or assigned. In these respects the paradox is empty of meaning and yet this emptiness becomes of mirror to the observer. As such it is a point by which the observers attention is transformed. You will find this method quite frequently in zen Buddhism where two opposing points, under the paradox, are observed and the cancelation causes a space of potentiality by which the observer is looking into a metaphorical mirror.
4. The fourth context is that the paradox becomes a dialectical synthesis where opposites merge to produce a new context. Aspects of an antithesis refine a thesis into a new truth, aspects of a these refine an antithesis into a new truth.
The foundational nature of paradox is context.
Context determines how the paradox unfolds to the observer and determines if a paradox exists at all.
Under one context the paradox can lead to gradation, another superpositioned logical states subject to context application, another a mirror to the observer by nature of being empty and finally the nature of dialectical synthesis.
A paradox has dualistic qualities:
1. It is a means of gradation.
2. It is a means of superpositioning where said superpositioning having a four-fold nature:
2a. Reflections of observer's patterns of perception.
2b. Projection of context by the observer.
2c. A void as potentiality of further values by the observer.
2d. Dialectical synthesis.