It is my personal experience that every single item, once it becomes sufficiently complex, develops its own specific language. The term ‘metalanguage’ is sometimes used, but, what makes language above or below? It is more of a Darmok for ideas. All language comes from some sort of idea or relation, bu analogy or otherwise. For instance, Achilles’ heel, that phrase gives rise to the idea of Achilles’ tendon. And, so on. There are various cases, but I do not wish to digress. Since I have started, however, I shall call it mesalanguage, as in, μέσα – inside. For, that is what these words are, an esoteric language, with usage only inside something. Allow me to continue, reader.
II.
I must say this: even across everywhere, I have not heard any term better than spaghetti towers. False axiom, perhaps? Nothing gets the concepts better than spaghetti towers – a large interconnected flow of assumptions. The main problem with spaghetti towers is that there is someitmes decay within some of the strands, and when one strand falls, it causes all the other strands that it supports to fall. In whole, the error with spaghetti towers is in how there can be no ε, for the existence of ε jeopardises the existence of everything upwards of that ε. This does not mean such towers cannot exist, however; rather, spaghetti towers are inevitably going to fall. It is a higher ateletheia - as near to 1 as can be given - that ε exists for all statments. ∀xT(x)<1. Therefore it must be given that spaghetti towers, which fall if ε is, not present, but if ε is found, rather - they must fall. With enough time and observation, they fall. This is the heat death of spaghetti - the inevitable decay of tiered and interconnected beliefs.
III.
Allow me to draw your mind, reader, back to the two ends of truth. Correspondence, and coherence. Correspondence truth is that which is observed, and coherence truth is the relation between other truths. However, as I have said time and time again, neither one can work effectively. I say this, because, if we operate between the two ends of truth, then we are guaranteed to have some form of relations by incorporating coherence; and the existence of relations is fundamental to spaghetti towers. The only type of truth that can not include spaghetti towers is correspondence, because there is no cause and effect in correspondence. That is, correspondence truth is the P and Q, and coherence truth is the →. We cannot have anything with only P and Q, nor with only →. So, allow me to sum up, then: Unless we only belive what we see, and refuse to beleive anything else, no conclusions, only observations, then we will inevitably have beliefs which rely upon each other. These beliefs cannot be guaranteed to be true, rather, there is ε. When these beliefs rely upon each other, these beliefs, under sufficient examination, will be exposed, and everything relying upon it will fall. Many beliefs are a lot of “ifs” and “thens”. They fall to heat death at one point or another. What is important is how one prepares for heat death. Do you remain stuck to a non-ε? Do you blindly refuse the possibility of Real 0? Spaghetti towers are our models, but models must be revised. All changes.
My apologies for the small volume on my own blog. I did think this fit here, however; so I put it here. Not everything I post here will go there, and vice versa.
I.
It is my personal experience that every single item, once it becomes sufficiently complex, develops its own specific language. The term ‘metalanguage’ is sometimes used, but, what makes language above or below? It is more of a Darmok for ideas. All language comes from some sort of idea or relation, bu analogy or otherwise. For instance, Achilles’ heel, that phrase gives rise to the idea of Achilles’ tendon. And, so on. There are various cases, but I do not wish to digress. Since I have started, however, I shall call it mesalanguage, as in, μέσα – inside. For, that is what these words are, an esoteric language, with usage only inside something. Allow me to continue, reader.
II.
I must say this: even across everywhere, I have not heard any term better than spaghetti towers. False axiom, perhaps? Nothing gets the concepts better than spaghetti towers – a large interconnected flow of assumptions. The main problem with spaghetti towers is that there is someitmes decay within some of the strands, and when one strand falls, it causes all the other strands that it supports to fall. In whole, the error with spaghetti towers is in how there can be no ε, for the existence of ε jeopardises the existence of everything upwards of that ε. This does not mean such towers cannot exist, however; rather, spaghetti towers are inevitably going to fall. It is a higher ateletheia - as near to 1 as can be given - that ε exists for all statments. ∀xT(x)<1. Therefore it must be given that spaghetti towers, which fall if ε is, not present, but if ε is found, rather - they must fall. With enough time and observation, they fall. This is the heat death of spaghetti - the inevitable decay of tiered and interconnected beliefs.
III.
Allow me to draw your mind, reader, back to the two ends of truth. Correspondence, and coherence. Correspondence truth is that which is observed, and coherence truth is the relation between other truths. However, as I have said time and time again, neither one can work effectively. I say this, because, if we operate between the two ends of truth, then we are guaranteed to have some form of relations by incorporating coherence; and the existence of relations is fundamental to spaghetti towers. The only type of truth that can not include spaghetti towers is correspondence, because there is no cause and effect in correspondence. That is, correspondence truth is the P and Q, and coherence truth is the →. We cannot have anything with only P and Q, nor with only →. So, allow me to sum up, then: Unless we only belive what we see, and refuse to beleive anything else, no conclusions, only observations, then we will inevitably have beliefs which rely upon each other. These beliefs cannot be guaranteed to be true, rather, there is ε. When these beliefs rely upon each other, these beliefs, under sufficient examination, will be exposed, and everything relying upon it will fall. Many beliefs are a lot of “ifs” and “thens”. They fall to heat death at one point or another. What is important is how one prepares for heat death. Do you remain stuck to a non-ε? Do you blindly refuse the possibility of Real 0? Spaghetti towers are our models, but models must be revised. All changes.
IV.
And so on.