dichotomistic logic

[jarod_al]

Hello everybody:
some time ago I came across this link:
_http://www.dichotomistic.com
and studying the Organic Logic inthere, it seemed to me a way to get closer to ontological understandings.

organicism as one, two, three....
Organic logic breaks neatly into three components because, when anything happens, there must of course be the “1, 2, 3” of a beginning, a middle, and an end. Some kind of initial conditions, a process that is the change, and then the outcome which is when things finally seem to have settled and so stopped happening. Here is a quick introduction to the 1, 2, 3 tale of vagueness, dichotomies and hierarchies that are the three essential components of any organic sequence of development.

In fact organic logic is more intricate. As the diagram suggests the three stages are themselves divided in varying degrees, so that they have a oneness or monadicity, a duality, and then a triality. Scholars of Peircean semiotics will recognise this as Peirce's interpretive system of firstness, secondness and thirdness. But everyone else only needs to notice the nesting of threeness here. You have the beginning, middle and end needed to tell a causal tale. But then there is also a change in the structure of things during this progression so that there is a singleness at the beginning, a duality as things happen, and then a triadic state of balance marking the final outcome.

any comments?

 

[Buddy]

Hello everybody:
some time ago I came across this link:
_http://www.dichotomistic.com
and studying the Organic Logic inthere, it seemed to me a way to get closer to ontological understandings.

[...]

any comments?

I've checked out the site. Of all the things I read there, I find it fascinating that this person is attempting to create this entire system of thought with absolutely no feedback from reality testing. In other words, I can't find an actual objective purpose ( a DOing of something) being served for all his thinking and writing. Am I missing something?

If I may ask, what meaning do you have for "ontological understandings"? Do you mean the nature of BEing, itself? How does the "Organic Logic" that you have studied so far, indicate a way to get closer to "ontological understandings" that the recommended reading list doesn't provide?

I'm just curious. I haven't perused the entire website, but what I did read just about gave me a headache...sorry.

 

[jarod_al]

Bud: I don't think, it will be difficult to have feedback from practical applications which ultimately prove viability. But reading again my statement regarding ontological mapping, I wonder where I got this from (not very scientific, isn't it)!
Call it Intuition, and as such, it is subjected to subjectivity...but isn't every concept first subjective? How can we start to explore objectivity if we do not have a subjective concept first? I think that that is where many of us fail, in exploring objectivity, and we fail due to our fear that the objective world would prove false the data obtained by intuition, or even prove false that there is something like a reliable information source named intuition. What else can we do, STS´s that we are.
jarod_al

 

[Buddy]

Bud: I don't think, it will be difficult to have feedback from practical applications which ultimately prove viability. But reading again my statement regarding ontological mapping, I wonder where I got this from (not very scientific, isn't it)!
Call it Intuition, and as such, it is subjected to subjectivity...but isn't every concept first subjective? How can we start to explore objectivity if we do not have a subjective concept first? I think that that is where many of us fail, in exploring objectivity, and we fail due to our fear that the objective world would prove false the data obtained by intuition, or even prove false that there is something like a reliable information source named intuition. What else can we do, STS´s that we are.
jarod_al

Well, I certainly don't think any subject is off limits. We can learn bits of objective reality from many different sources, I guess. DCM knows I have read tons and tons of stuff in a wide variety of fields in search of Truth so that my understanding of reality maps to actual objective reality.

"Knowledge protects, ignorance endangers" seems useful to mention here. By knowing about yourself and all the possible ways that 'considering' can cause us to stop self-remembering, we can probably explore just about anything with some positive results, osit.