On the consequences of Russell’s paradox

The fundamental problem with speech (ie, Russell’s paradox, which I discussed in my latest post) is also the reason why reality is consistent. It makes reality appear two-sided (dual) for us, but is at the same time the hub that reality rotates around. Reality isn’t any of the aspects we partition it into, neither both of them, but rather none of them. Instead, reality is a complete and self-sufficient system. The fundamental problem with speech for us is thus also the basis for the existence of reality.

It means that reality is incomprehensible for us per definition. What we call “emptiness” is just our invention. It does not have any real equivalent, There simply isn’t any real emptiness. Instead, emptiness is equivalent to form (eg, your and my forms), ie, infinity, with the difference that emptiness is uncountable infinity whereas form is countable infinity. Reality does not have a beginning and an end, as we in the Western world assume it does as an axiom, but instead circles around the same hub that is our problem with speech. Understanding of reality thus requires understanding of how our problem to understand reality can be the hub that makes reality possible. Understanding is thus basically the same as the problem it tries to understand.

In this context, we can make models of how reality functions, but can not understand what it is. Ideas of a single truth, like a true tree of life (cldistics) or Higgs particle (particle physics) are thus vain. If any of them would be correct, then the basis for them would disappear.

Another contribution to understanding of conceptualization http://menvall.wordpress.com/