|
|
|
|
The apparent clash with
common and scientific views
|
|
It is not unexpected that
the view may appear to clash with scientific and common views of the world.
However, provided that ‘scientific’ and ‘common’ are adequately understood,
there is no clash; in fact, with these provisos, the scientific and the common
are—shown to be—necessary
|
|
Although there are
criticisms of science, the function of these criticisms includes showing the
place of science and not rejection of it. There is no anti-scientific intent
or sentiment to the present work. A critical view is an understanding; it
shows truths and limits. Provided that it is understood that the
understanding of the nature and method of science may evolve andor capable of
alternate interpretation, it is revealed that the final ideal form of
understanding may be that of Science—distinguished from present science by
capitalization
|
|
What is shown here is that
the only Law—Laws—of the Universe is Logic. This is to be understood with the
proviso that it amounts to a concept or definition of Logic whose
specification is to emerge rather than to be posited at outset—hence the
capitalization that distinguishes the present concept, Logic, from logic and
the classical logics. Two difficulties of understanding arise immediately.
First, is the traditional view of logic being rejected? No—what is valid in
logic and the traditional logics lie within Logic. A second difficulty is
that if the only Law regarding what obtains is that of Logic does this not
imply that the Universe is infinitely more varied than as understood, for
example, in modern theoretical physics? The answer is ‘yes.’ For those for
whom modern physics defines the universe there may be a clash of the view
from physics with the view from Logic. This clash or jar of views has been
experienced by the author
|
|
|
|
What is demonstrated?
|
|
The following are
demonstrated. (1) The Law of the Universe is Logic. (2) The existence of
Normal domains including that of this cosmos is necessary
|
|
This world, this
cosmos—i.e., our world, our cosmos—are Normal concepts
|
|
Additionally, the nature of
‘demonstration’ is clarified, grounded and advanced. Since a system of
thought cannot found itself it is often thought that no absolute foundations
are possible. However this is the foundational fallacy—the idea that only
thought can found thought. A founding or grounding in—our—being is
demonstrated or shown
|
There is an
apparent clash with common—limited—and scientific views of the Universe