[continued from previous message]   
      
   >          That the classical thinkers were not trying to deny reality,   
   > but were trying to understand it.   
   >      Sufficient, Thorough Reason:   
   >          The emphasis on "Sufficient, Thorough Reason" reinforces the   
   > classical commitment to comprehensive and coherent explanations.   
   >          That the classical thinkers were attempting to create complete   
   > systems of thought.   
   >      Inverse Primary Over Contradiction:   
   >          The idea that the inverse (induction) is primary over   
   > contradiction suggests a willingness to embrace complexity and   
   > ambiguity, rather than resorting to simplistic binary oppositions.   
   >   
   > Super-Scientific Omni and Supreme:   
   >   
   >      Respect for the Transcendent:   
   >          The decision to leave notions of the Omni and Supreme as   
   > super-scientific reflects a respect for the limits of human   
   > understanding and a recognition of the transcendent.   
   >          This is a way of acknowledging that there are things beyond the   
   > grasp of science.   
   >      Apophatic Approach:   
   >          This approach aligns with apophatic theology, which emphasizes   
   > the limitations of language and reason in describing the divine.   
   >   
   > Post-Modern Constructiveness:   
   >   
   >      Deconstruction as Structuralism:   
   >          Your assertion that deconstruction can be structuralist   
   > challenges the conventional view of post-modernism as purely destructive.   
   >          It suggests that deconstruction can be used to reveal the   
   > underlying structures of thought and language, paving the way for new   
   > and more robust frameworks.   
   >      Post-Modern Not Necessarily Disfigurist:   
   >          The idea that post-modernism need not be disfigurist reinforces   
   > the potential for constructive engagement with post-modern ideas.   
   >          Post-modern tools can be used to build, and not just to destroy.   
   >   
   > Mathematical and Foundational Apologetics:   
   >   
   >      Foundations All the Way Down:   
   >          The concept of "foundations all the way down" suggests a   
   > radical form of foundationalism, where even simple inductive   
   > regularities are grounded in deeper, more fundamental principles.   
   >          This is a search for the ultimate foundations of knowledge.   
   >      Mathematical Apologetics:   
   >          This approach can be seen as a form of mathematical   
   > apologetics, where mathematical and logical principles are used to   
   > defend and justify philosophical and theological claims.   
   >          Using the tools of mathematics, to prove philosophical concepts.   
   >      Simple Inductive Regularities:   
   >          The idea that even simple inductive regularities have a deep   
   > foundation, shows a search for a fully complete system.   
   >   
   > Overall Implications:   
   >   
   >      This perspective offers a more integrated and nuanced understanding   
   > of the relationship between classical and post-modern thought.   
   >      It emphasizes the potential for constructive engagement with both   
   > traditions, seeking to build upon their strengths and overcome their   
   > limitations.   
   >      It is a search for a complete, and coherent, system of thought.   
   >   
   > In essence, you're advocating for a sophisticated and integrated   
   > approach to knowledge, one that draws upon the richness of the classical   
   > tradition and the critical insights of post-modern thought.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > Thanks GG. That's a reasonable way to put it. Comment on similar efforts   
   > particularly of a sort of coherent, in the sense of internally coherent,   
   > treatment of the language and the theory.   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   >   
   > You're focusing on a crucial aspect: the pursuit of a coherent,   
   > internally consistent treatment of both language and theory. This is a   
   > challenging but essential goal for any comprehensive philosophical or   
   > scientific system. Here's a reflection on similar efforts and the   
   > significance of this pursuit:   
   >   
   > The Importance of Coherence:   
   >   
   >      Internal Consistency:   
   >          Internal coherence is paramount for any theory. A theory that   
   > contradicts itself is rendered useless.   
   >          This applies to both the formal structure of the theory and the   
   > language used to express it.   
   >      Language as a Tool:   
   >          Language is not merely a neutral medium for conveying ideas; it   
   > shapes and influences our understanding of those ideas.   
   >          A coherent treatment of language involves ensuring that the   
   > terms and concepts used in the theory are defined precisely and   
   > consistently.   
   >          That the language, does not create contradictions within the   
   > theory.   
   >      Avoiding Ambiguity:   
   >          Ambiguity in language can lead to misinterpretations and   
   > inconsistencies in the theory.   
   >          A coherent approach seeks to minimize ambiguity by providing   
   > clear and unambiguous definitions.   
   >      Reflexivity:   
   >          A truly coherent theory must be able to account for its own   
   > language and its own structure.   
   >          This involves a kind of reflexivity, where the theory can   
   > reflect on itself and explain its own workings.   
   >   
   > Similar Efforts:   
   >   
   >      Logical Positivism:   
   >          Logical positivists, such as Rudolf Carnap and A.J. Ayer,   
   > sought to create a coherent system of knowledge based on logical   
   > analysis and empirical verification.   
   >          They emphasized the importance of precise language and the   
   > elimination of metaphysical speculation.   
   >          They attempted to create a language that perfectly reflected   
   > reality.   
   >      Formal Systems:   
   >          Mathematicians and logicians have developed formal systems,   
   > such as axiomatic set theory and formal logic, to ensure internal   
   > consistency and coherence.   
   >          These systems provide precise rules for constructing and   
   > manipulating symbols, minimizing the risk of ambiguity and contradiction.   
   >      Wittgenstein's Tractatus:   
   >          Wittgenstein's "Tractatus Logico-Philosophicus" is a prime   
   > example of an attempt to create a coherent system of language and logic.   
   >          He sought to define the limits of language and to show how   
   > language can accurately represent reality.   
   >          His later work, the philosophical investigations, shows his   
   > change of mind regarding the possibility of a perfect language.   
   >      Spinoza's Ethics:   
   >          Spinoza's Ethics, attempted to create a fully coherent   
   > philosophical system, that was built on axioms, and definitions, in the   
   > same way that geometry is.   
   >      Modern type theory:   
   >          Modern type theory, as used in computer science, and   
   > mathematics, attempts to build systems where language, and the theory   
   > that it describes, are one and the same thing.   
   >   
   > Challenges and Considerations:   
   >   
   >      The Limits of Language:   
   >          Language is inherently ambiguous and context-dependent, making   
   > it difficult to achieve perfect coherence.   
   >          The work of philosophers like Derrida highlights the   
   > instability of language and the impossibility of escaping ambiguity.   
   >      The Problem of Self-Reference:   
   >          Self-referential systems can lead to paradoxes and   
   > contradictions, as demonstrated by Gödel's incompleteness theorems.   
   >          These limitations highlight the challenges of creating a fully   
   > coherent system that can account for itself.   
   >      The Ongoing Pursuit:   
   >          The pursuit of coherence is an ongoing process, a continuous   
   > effort to refine and improve our understanding of language and theory.   
   >          The goal is to get closer to a perfect system, even if   
   > perfection is impossible.   
   >   
      
   [continued in next message]   
      
   --- SoupGate-DOS v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)