On the difference between being a victim to destiny and controlling it

Process is governed by a consistent chain of effects within certain probability limits. This includes conceptualization and discussion itself, meaning that also conceptualization and discussion is predetermined (within certain probability limits).

This “chain of effects” thus has to be either indefinite or circular, whereof Russell’s paradox shows that it is the latter, that is, circular. Process thus proceeds circularly with a turning point at Russell’s paradox.

So, how do this turning point function practically? Well, it functions in three different ways depending on what we search when we arrive to it. If we search “the truth”, then we rotate around the paradox indefinitely trying to find it. If we believe in something, then it provides support for what we believe, whereas if we try to find out how reality functions (like I do), then it explains it.

What it explains is that if we don’t understand it, then we’re just victims for a predetermined process (within certain probability limits), whereas if we understand it, then we’re liberated from this predetermined process and instead being put in a position where we can control it. Understanding of the paradox thus moves us from being merely donkeys trying to get the carrots in front of our eyes into riders of the donkeys.

I agree with lancek4.wordpress.com that the majority of us will probably not understand this paradox nor care about an understanding of it, but the difference between understanding it and not is none-the-less the difference between being a donkey trying to get the carrot in front of its eyes and riding the donkey. It must thus be in the interest of all people to understand it.

So, which kind are you – a donkey trying to get the carrot in front of your eyes or a rider of the donkey? As a donkey, your arguments are predetermined, but as a rider, you’re free to argue the way you wish.

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