Thesis Statement Inventions: Fill & Download for Free

Already MentionedGödel, Escher, Bach; Thinking, Fast and Slow; Predictably Irrational; Darwin's Dangerous Idea; Intuition Pumps And Other Tools for Thinking; Amazon.com: The Selfish Gene; The Black Swan; Antifragile; The Symbolic Species; The User Illusion; The Beginning of Infinity;My Top Picks For General ReadersThe Goodness Paradox: The Strange Relationship Between Virtue and Violence in Human Evolution: Richard WranghamWrangham is a primatologist who theorizes (along with other biologists) that humans are a domesticated animal. Sounds silly? Who or what domesticated us? Read the book!Enlightenment Now: The Case for Reason, Science, Humanism, and Progress: Steven PinkerThis book is misunderstood, presumably by people who haven’t actually read it, because the prose is pretty clear. It’s doesn’t argue that the Enlightenment has been perfectly realized or that enlightenment values are perfect values.It argues that we’ve made progress and that we need to be as honest about the wins of Western Civilizations as we are about its crimes and losses—not to pat ourselves on the back, and certainly not to ignore the plight of the disenfranchised. It’s important to focus on what works so we can keep doing it and refine it, to make it better.The Elephant in the Brain: Hidden Motives in Everyday Life: Kevin Simler, Robin Hanson: Books"If you want to know what makes people tick, read The Elephant in the Brain. Simler and Hanson have created the most comprehensive, powerful, unified explanation of human nature and behavior to date." --Jason Brennan, Professor of Business, Georgetown UniversityCo-author Robin Hanson describes himself as “nerdy.” I would call this book An Autistic’s Guide to Human Nature. It’s a deep look at behavior, by “an anthropologist on Mars.”Moral Tribes: Emotion, Reason, and the Gap Between Us and Them: Joshua GreeneThis is the best book about morality I've ever read. The first half is a tour of the current science (social science, anthropology, animal studies, brain-imaging, evolutionary theory, etc) that is connected with morality. The second half is a philosophical (and psychological) defense of the moral theory called Utilitarianism. Even if you're wind up rejecting that theory, you'll find huge value in this book. The writing is crystal clear, provocative, and laced with humor.“After two and a half millennia, it’s rare to come across a genuinely new idea on the nature of morality, but in this book Joshua Greene advances not one but several. Greene combines neuroscience with philosophy not as a dilettante but as an expert in both fields, and his synthesis is interdisciplinary in the best sense of using all available conceptual tools to understand a deep phenomenon. Moral Tribes is a landmark in our understanding of morality and the moral sense.” -- Steven PinkerSapiens: A Brief History of Humankind by Yuval Noah Harari.This is one of the top-ten non-fiction books I've read in my life. Whether or not you agree with everything in it, the book will give you something interesting to think about on almost every page. Some of it might piss you off, too.Harari's thesis is that what makes humans unique is our capacity to invent fictions and use them to structure our lives. Without believing in them, or acting as if we do, we would not be able to live together in cities or collaborate on large-scale projects. The obvious fiction is religion (well, it's fiction to those of us who aren't religious), but other fictions include free will, morality, nations, money, liberal values, legal systems, etc."Sapiens" makes its arguments using a fusion of History, Economics, Psychology, Biology, Philosophy, and pure confidence.UPDATE: I also highly recommend the sequel, Homo Deus: A Brief History of Tomorrow, which uses current and historical trends to discuss the future of humanity.You Just Don't Understand: Women and Men in Conversation: Deborah Tannen.Tannon, a linguist, had the clever idea of framing women and men are two different cultures—and to study their "languages" the way one would study English and French. The book made me think beyond "the battle of the sexes" to the many ways words can both clarify our ideas and befuddle our listeners. This is a great books for couples, writers, actors, and students of human nature.The Little Schemer - 4th Edition: Daniel P. Friedman, Matthias Felleisen, Duane Bibby, Gerald J. Sussman.The authors use a Socratic approach to teach a difficult subject: recursion. This is a book you work through with pencil and paper, and, if you work through it, the way it stretches your mind will be more meaningful to you than the subject it teaches. It begins with the simplest of ideas and very gradually ramps up the complexity, until, by the end, your understanding is at a high level. This book is takes teaching and elevates it to a work of art. It's sort of a computer-programming book, but you don't need any programming experience to work through it.From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life 1500 to the Present: Jacques Barzun.Barzun tells the entire story of Modern Western History, making a brilliant case that there really is such a thing: that, in a sense, our culture began on its current (and future) course 500 years ago, at the birth of the Reformation. As with the best of this sort of book, it doesn't matter if you agree or disagree with its premise. It's value is that it makes a clear statement, one that will prompt you towards a sharp reaction.A Pattern Language: Towns, Buildings, Construction: Christopher Alexander."Brilliant....Here's how to design or redesign any space you're living or working in--from metropolis to room. Consider what you want to happen in the space, and then page through this book. Its radically conservative observations will spark, enhance, organize your best ideas, and a wondrous home, workplace, town will result."--San Francisco ChronicleThis book's influence has leaked into other fields, notably Computer Science.The Righteous Mind: Why Good People Are Divided by Politics and Religion: Jonathan Haidt.Why are Conservatives and Liberals they way they are? Why are they so often at odds? Is it due to Nature or Nurture? This book delves into why we so often argue each other. It explores the core values we live by, both consciously and unconsciously. Check out the author's TED talks!Jonathan Haidt: The moral roots of liberals and conservatives | Video on TED.comJonathan Haidt: Religion, evolution, and the ecstasy of self-transcendence | Video on TED.comEvolution for Everyone: How Darwin's Theory Can Change the Way We Think About Our Lives: David Sloan Wilson.This is a great companion to "The Selfish Gene," and it's a good recommendation for people who are interested in the subject but turned off by Dawkins."Evolution for Everyone is a remarkable contribution. No other author has managed to combine mastery of the subject with such a clear and interesting explanation of what it all means for human self-understanding. Aimed at the general reader, yet peppered with ideas original enough to engage scholars, it is truly a book for our time. "—Edward O. Wilson, Pulitzer Prize-winning author of On Human NatureThe Master Switch: The Rise and Fall of Information Empires: Tim Wu.This book puts the Internet, and, more specifically, the forces that control it, in a historical context. Rather than seeing the web as a unique and new thing, Wu considers it along with the telegraph, radio, telephone, and television networks. His book is a good general history of communication networks.Games People Play: The Basic Handbook of Transactional Analysis: Eric Berne.The three people in the world who are still believers in Transactional Analysis will be upset by the following claim: it's a "toy psychology." As far as I'm concerned, it's an oversimplified model of how humans work. And that's its strength. It's a kind of "Humans for Dummies." It's a marvelous books for fiction writers and actors, and even though it's an oversimplified model, it contains many grains of truth. Berne thought of all human interactions as games with winners and losers. And the book is a compendium of those games.How to Solve It: G. Polya.If you ever have to solve problems (of any type), it's worth reading this book."Every prospective teacher should read it. In particular, graduate students will find it invaluable. The traditional mathematics professor who reads a paper before one of the Mathematical Societies might also learn something from the book: 'He writes a, he says b, he means c; but it should be d.' "--E. T. Bell, Mathematical Monthly"[This] elementary textbook on heuristic reasoning, shows anew how keen its author is on questions of method and the formulation of methodological principles. Exposition and illustrative material are of a disarmingly elementary character, but very carefully thought out and selected."--Herman Weyl, Mathematical ReviewWhat Is the Name of This Book?: The Riddle of Dracula and Other Logical Puzzles: Raymond M. Smullyan.Smullyan wrote many puzzle books, and I picked this one pretty much at random. When I was a kid, I worked through all of them, and it was as if I could feel my brain growing. Here's an example to give you a taste:Dr. Tarr is a psychologist with the Department of Health. Her job is to inspect asylums to determine whether they are in compliance with the law. Asylums have Doctors and Patients. In a compliant asylum, all the doctors are sane and all the patients are insane. Clearly, an asylum with an insane doctor or a sane patient is Not A Good Thing.Sane persons are correct in all of their beliefs. Insane persons are incorrect in all of their beliefs. Both sane and insane persons are scrupulously honest: they always state what they believe to be the case. Unfortunately, the asylums are very modern and do not use identifying devices such as uniforms, ID tags, or other devices to show which persons are doctors and which are patients. Nor is it possible to know whether a person is sane or insane by any means other than questioning them.One day, after inspecting a number of asylums, Dr. Tarr was having a drink and cigar with her good friend Professor Feather. The professor found her work interesting and asked her to recount some of her findings.“Well,” said Dr. Tarr, “at the first asylum I visited, I met an inhabitant who made a single statement. I immediately took steps to have them released.”“Wait,” interjected the professor, “so you’re saying this person was not an insane patient?”“Of course,” replied Dr. Tarr.Professor Feather thought for a moment, then asked “How is that possible? This sounds like the old Liar and Truth Teller puzzle. This person either told the truth or they lied. But there are four possibilities for any person in an asylum: Sane Doctor, Insane Patient, Insane Doctor, or Sane Patient.“Even if you knew whether they were lying or telling the truth, that would only narrow the matter down to two possibilities. For example, if they told a truth such as ‘two plus two equals four’, you would know that they were Sane. But how would you know that they were a Patient, not a Doctor?”Dr. Tarr replied with a chuckle “I agree that I could not have deduced what to do based on an inhabitant saying ‘two plus two equals four’. But in this case, the patient was quite intelligent and thought of a single statement which could establish the fact that only a Sane Patient could make that statement.“I’m sure if you think about it, you could construct such a statement. Name a statement which could only be uttered by a Sane Patient.”-- A Few Easy Ones from Raymond Smullyan.The Ghost Map: The Story of London's Most Terrifying Epidemic--and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World: Steven Johnson.This is one of the most entertaining History books I've ever read, but it goes beyond that. As it explores the biases that keep smart people from understanding "obvious" truths, it delves into Psychology and even Philosophy.UPDATE: And if you enjoy that, you’ll surely love The Sun and the Moon: The Remarkable True Account of Hoaxers, Showmen, Dueling Journalists, and Lunar Man-Bats in Nineteenth-Century New York by Matthew Goodman, which is the story of an incredible (and widely-believed) series of news stories that claimed the moon was teaming with life—including intelligent life.Metaphors We Live By: George Lakoff, Mark Johnson.This book explores a fascinating thesis about how we think. The authors believe that metaphor is a core part of human cognition and that our writing, speech, and ideas are laced with metaphors and metaphorical frameworks we often fail to notice. It's terrific food for thought, whether you wind up agreeing or disagreeing.The Hero with a Thousand Faces: Joseph Campbell.“Campbell’s words carry extraordinary weight, not only among scholars but among a wide range of other people who find his search down mythological pathways relevant to their lives today....The book for which he is most famous, The Hero with a Thousand Faces [is] a brilliant examination, through ancient hero myths, of man’s eternal struggle for identity.” — TimeMind Children: The Future of Robot and Human Intelligence: Hans Moravec.One would be making a mistake to let Mind Children recede unopened into a guiltless oblivion. It's a tonic book, thought-provoking on every page. And it reminds us that, in our accelerating, headlong era, the future presses so close upon us that those who ignore it inhabit not the present but the past.--Brad Leithauser (New Yorker )Moravec, by his own admission, is an intellectual joyrider, and riding his runaway trains of thought is an exhilarating experience...This is an intellectual party that shouldn't be pooped, no matter how much it may disturb the neighbours and encourage over-indulgence.--Brian Woolley (Guardian )In the Blink of an Eye Revised 2nd Edition: Walter Murch.This book, by one of Hollywood's greatest editors, goes beyond explaining a single craft. It's a door into the brain of a brilliant technician and problem solver, and many pages of it gifted me new ways of thinking, even though I'm not an editor. For instance, Murch came up with the simple (but genius) idea of taping two tiny, cut-out paper people to the bottom of his monitor. They continually remind him of the scale at which people will see movie images when they are in the theatre.The Age of Insight: The Quest to Understand the Unconscious in Art, Mind, and Brain, from Vienna 1900 to the Present: Eric Kandel.This is an Art History/Criticism book written by a neuroscientist.“Eric Kandel has succeeded in a brilliant synthesis that would have delighted and fascinated Freud: Using Viennese culture of the twentieth century as a lens, he examines the intersections of psychology, neuroscience, and art. The Age of Insight is a tour-de-force that sets the stage for a twenty-first-century understanding of the human mind in all its richness and diversity.”—Oliver Sacks, author of The Mind’s Eye and The Man Who Mistook His Wife for a Hat“In a polymathic performance, a Nobel laureate weaves together the theories and practices of neuroscience, art and psychology to show how our creative brains perceive and engage art—and are consequently moved by it. . . . A transformative work that joins the hands of Art and Science and makes them acknowledge their close kinship.”—Kirkus Reviews (STARRED)“Engrossing … Nobel-winning neuroscientist Kandel excavates the hidden workings of the creative mind. Kandel writes perceptively about a range of topics, from art history—the book’s color reproductions alone make it a great browse—to dyslexia. … Kandel captures the reader’s imagination with intriguing historical syntheses and fascinating scientific insights into how we see—and feel—the world.”—Publisher’s Weekly“A fascinating meditation on the interplay among art, psychology and brain science. The author, who fled Vienna as a child, has remained captivated by Austrian artists Gustav Klimt, Oskar Kokoschka and Egon Schiele, each of whom was profoundly influenced by Sigmund Freud and by the emerging scientific approach to medicine in their day … [calls] for a new, interdisciplinary approach to understanding the mind, one that combines the humanities with the natural and social sciences.”—Scientific American“Eric Kandel’s book is a stunning achievement, remarkable for its scientific, artistic, and historical insights. No one else could have written this book—all its readers will be amply rewarded.”—Howard Gardner, Hobbs Professor of Cognition and Education, Harvard Graduate School of Education“Eric Kandel’s training as a psychiatrist and his vast knowledge of how the brain works enrich this thoroughly original exploration of the relationship between the birth of psychoanalysis, Austrian Expressionism, and Modernism in Vienna.”—Margaret Livingstone, Professor of Neurobiology, Harvard Medical School“This is the book that Charles Darwin would have produced, had he chosen to write about art and aesthetics. Kandel, one of the great pioneers of modern neuroscience, has effectively bridged the ‘two cultures’—science and humanities. This is a task that many philosophers, especially those called ‘new mysterians,’ had considered impossible.”—V. S. Ramachandran, author of The Tell-Tale BrainSex at Dawn: How We Mate, Why We Stray, and What It Means for Modern Relationships: Christopher Ryan, Cacilda Jetha.If you want to grapple with understanding human sexuality, I recommend you read this book and its criticism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sex_at_Dawn#ReceptionUncommon Sense: The Heretical Nature of Science by Alan CromerRecommended to me by William Archibald, this is a paradigm-shifting book about the history of Science, though Cromer disputes the whole idea of paradigms. According to Cromer, Science was anything but inevitable. The forces that started it got invented once in history, in ancient Greece. Had that not happened, there's no reason to believe we'd have Science and scientists today.The book spans all the way from the origin of our species to speculation about intelligent life on other planets.EducationHow Children Fail: John Holt.A better title might be "How Teachers Fail." When I was in my teens and first starting to grapple with problems in Education, this book opened my eyes. It started me thinking in ways that had never occurred to me before.Wounded by School: Recapturing the Joy in Learning and Standing Up to Old School Culture: Kirsten Olson.Kirsten Olson's book is refreshingly unlike the general run of sludge I associate with writing about pedagogy: It seems to be entirely free of the familiar platitudes which replace thought when we read about school matters, is scrubbed clean of pretentious jargon, and offers up the twists and turns of Olson's analysis and citations with beautiful clarity. I can't imagine anyone not being better for reading this book Twice! --John Taylor Gatto, Author, Dumbing Us DownSummerhill School: A New View of Childhood: A. S. Neill, Albert Lamb.This book will challenge your ideas about education, whether you wind up agreeing with it or raging against it. While I was suffering through a traditional American public high school, this book showed me there were other possibilities, which both fascinated and depressed me. I longed to go to Summerhill.Mindstorms: Children, Computers, And Powerful Ideas: Seymour A. Papert."This is the best book I have ever read on how to assist people to learn for themselves. Papert began his work by collaborating with Jean Piaget, and then applied those perspectives in a self-programming language designed to help children learn math and physics.Papert explains Piaget's work and provides case studies of how the programming language, LOGO, can help. He provides a wonderful contrasting explanation of the weaknesses of how math and physics are usually taught in schools." -- from an Amazon reader review.See also Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre: Keith Johnstone, below (in the theatre section).The Educated Mind: How Cognitive Tools Shape Our Understanding by Kieran EganThis book, despite its boring title, is one of the most exciting intellectual adventures I've ever had. (And also despite its boring title, it's readable and witty.) It's an exciting book even if you have no specific interest in education.Egan's thesis (which will make your neurons tingle, even if you disagree with it) is that human civilizations have gone through five intellectual stages, which he calls somatic, mythic, romantic, philosophic, and ironic. His second thesis is that education is best when kids are allowed to fully experience and integrate each of these thinking styles.Somatic learners experience through their bodies, and we are born to learn this way. Babies learn somatically when they go from crawling to walking and when they come to understand gravity's effects by knocking over block towers.Mythic understanding involves binary categories, most famously good and evil. Pretty much everything is understood as an epic (and often magical) opposition: wicked stepmother vs handsome prince; David vs Goliath; Bilbo vs Smaug...Egan believes pre-literate cultures understand the world primarily in terms of the somatic and mythic. As they become literate, people are able to think in other forms, with the romantic bridging mythic and philosophic modes.Romantic thinking is a sort of taming of mythic thinking. It's still extreme, but instead of thinking in terms of cosmic forces or gods and goddesses, it focusing on human and natural extremes. When children become romantic thinkers, they tend to lose some of their interest in monsters and superheroes and become obsessed with human feats, like the ones in the Guinness Book of World Records. Or their gods and monsters become more human-like, as are the troubled citizens of the Marvel Universe.As people focus less on the realm of demons and dragons and more on the real world (even if mostly on the extreme parts of it), they begin to notice patterns and abstractions. Maybe there are traits all lizards have in common; maybe tall is a useful category for both mountains and skyscrapers. These thoughts lead to philosophic thinking, which gives us the tools we need to do math, science, and to theorize about history, literature and to think about any topic in an abstract or algorithmic form.In the end, we notice that our abstractions have holes in them. They are useful, but they don't perfectly model reality. And they tend to get tarnished by social and political biases. These realizations lead to ironic thinking, which is impossible to do in any major sense without first developing philosophic thinking, which in turn is founded on romantic, mythic, and somatic thinking.Egan doesn't champion any of these modes over the others. He doesn't rank them. He also takes pains to say that though they have a hierarchical relationship, it's not a neat one. They leak into each other and coexist. Mythic thinkers may not be all that good at thinking ironically, but they still manage to do it sometimes, and while the philosophic mind loses some of its nimbleness with romance, it never totally loses its romantic inclinations.His main suggestion, in the parts of the book dealing with education, is that to realize their full potential as thinkers, children must be allowed and encouraged to pass through all these stages, and depending on where his chargers are in terms of intellectual maturity, a teacher must have the ability to teach in ways that stimulate all these modes. Most eight-year-olds are romantic thinkers, and teachers do them a disservice by leaping into philosophic mode rather than capitalizing on the strengths of romance.The book also explores what's wrong with current educational systems. Egan suggests (and I agree) that the fundamental problem is that schools have three incompatible goals (and Egan explains the history behind them). Schools attempt to socialize, which in most First World countries means preparing kids for work in corporations; they also attempt to indoctrinate kids into a core curriculum of some kind; finally, they attempt to spur kids into becoming individuals--into being creative, emotionally satisfied, unique beings. The inevitable muddle comes when the needs of the business world (or the requirements of the core curriculum) collide with the needs of the individual.Most schools and teachers don't acknowledge (or even understand) this conflict exists and give kids no help in putting all the pieces together. They just say, "Here's all the stuff. Some parts don't fit well with other parts. Don't complain about that. Figure out a way to cope on your own. Sink or swim."When I was just halfway through with "The Educated Mind," I knew it was going to be a a game-changing book for me. Ever since reading it, I've examined my work to see if it contains all the levels of thought (and experience). I'm talking about my writing, my reading, and my work in the theatre. Am I communicating on somatic, mythic, romantic, philosophic, and ironic levels? If not, is there some way I can enrich my work so that it at least touches on all those modes.The greatest works of art do. That's a subjective call, of course, but it's true in my opinion. Think "2001," "The Great Gatsby," "One Hundred Years of Solitude," "King Lear" ...The Case against Education: Why the Education System Is a Waste of Time and Money by Bryan CaplanTerrific, challenging book by a heretical economist who slaughters every sacred cow in the pasture. Even if all the book does is make you angry, it will give you things to think about.This is the only book I know of that tackles both the problems with eduction for the individual and whether or not the huge amount we spend on education is a good value for society.WritingIn my view, despite frequent references to "Elements of Style" and Stephen King's "On Writing," there are few good books on how to write. Most of what learned was either by reading and imitation or from short essays, such as Orwell's Politics and the English Language and Twain's "Finmore Cooper's Literary Offenses": http://www.gutenberg.org/files/3172/3172-h/3172-h.htm.I've tried to list most of my core beliefs about writing, here: Marcus Geduld's answer to What should every aspiring writer know about writing?These three books (really four, since the first is a collection of two books) stand out. The first ...Hat Box: The Collected Lyrics of Stephen Sondheim: Stephen Sondheim.... is a thorough analysis of Sondheim's lyrics—by Sondheim. In case you don't know who he is, he's the generally-acknowledge "greatest muscial-theatre composer/lyricist of all time." His shows include "Sweeney Todd," "A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to the Forum", and "West Side Story" (lyrics only). What sets his books apart is the care he takes over evert single word and the lucid explanations with which he explains his choices. Read these books even if you're a non-lyricist.The Sense of Style: The Thinking Person's Guide to Writing in the 21st Century by Steven Pinker.This is the best guide to prose style I've ever read. It's biased towards a simple style, but if you can master that, you can use it as a foundation to build on.Clear and Simple as the Truth: Francis-Noël Thomas, Mark Turner.Though somewhat dry, this is the only book I know of that clearly explains how to write in a very specific style. And it's kind-of the ur-style: the one I'd argue all writers should master before going on to anything more complicated. It's what "Elements of Style" should be but isn't.TheatreA Practical Handbook for the Actor: Melissa Bruder, Lee Michael Cohn, Madeleine Olnek, Nathaniel Pollack, Robert Previtio, Scott Zigler, David Mamet.This is the best introduction I've ever read to Stanislavsky-based acting. (See Constantin Stanislavski). I think of it as book one in a three-book trilogy. (Composed of this book and the next two in my list.)It helps actors avoid playing murky emotional states and become active on stage. Its core approach is to have actors choose goals for each moment they are on stage.If you know someone who is thinking of becoming an actor, get him this book.The Actor and the Target: Declan Donnellan.This book (part two of my ad-hoc trilogy) delves into one specific aspect of Stanislavsky-based acting: the person (the other actor) or object you're trying to affect when you're on stage. As a director, I find motivating actors towards targets tremendously useful. For instance, if an actor is trying to "be sexy" I ask him to stop and, instead, to try to get the actress (the target) to kiss him.How to Stop Acting: Harold Guskin.In my mind, there's tremendous value in Stanislavky's system, which forms the basis of the first two books on this list. But in the end, most actors need to let all frameworks go, stop thinking about them, and just improvise. They must "be in the moment."This is the best treatment I've found of this slippery subject. Guskin was the acting coach to James Gandalfini, Kevin, Kline, Glenn Close and many other famous actors.Different Every Night: Putting the play on stage and keeping it fresh: Mike Alfreds.This book clearly explores what to me is the core difference between theatre and film. Filmmakers must sweat to get the best performance possible onto film. Theatre practitioners should, if they're smart, create an environment where there is no "best." Great theatre should be different every night (or why not see a film, instead?). Each actor in each performance should try something new, and all the performances, taken together, should explore every avenue of the story, every possible interpretation.Notes on Directing: 130 Lessons in Leadership from the Director's Chair: Frank Hauser, Russell Reich.The ideas behind directing are very, very simple: watch and listen; avoid doing anything most of the time; step in with a suggestion when necessary. But, boy oh boy, is it hard to put these simple procedures into practice! Most directors do too much. Or they focus on the wrong things. I read this smart little book before every rehearsal period.Impro: Improvisation and the Theatre: Keith Johnstone.Impro ought to be required reading not only for theatre people generally but also for teachers, educators, and students of all kinds and persuasions. Readers of this book are not going to agree with everything in it; but if they are not challenged by it, if they do not ultimately succumb to its wisdom and whimsicality, they are in a very sad state indeed . . . .Johnstone seeks to liberate the imagination, to cultivate in the adult the creative power of the child . . . .Deserves to be widely read and tested in the classroom and rehearsal hall . . . Full of excellent good sense, actual observations and inspired assertions.–CHOICE: Books for College LibrariesShakespeareThinking Shakespeare: A How-to Guide for Student Actors, Directors, and Anyone Else Who Wants to Feel More Comfortable With the Bard: Barry Edelstein.This is the only worthwhile Shakespeare book I've ever found for beginning actors, and seasoned actors who are new to Shakespeare. Even pros will probably learn something from it. And it's a cool book for Shakespeare fans, too, who want to learn how to read the plays better and who want an understanding of how Shakespeare's approach it.Hamlet in Purgatory: Stephen Greenblatt."Hamlet" has a bewildering and brilliant relationship to Religion, and this is the best book on the subject.Hamlet and Revenge: Eleanor Prosser.Elizabethan morality considered revenge to be a great sin. So how is it possible that Shakespeare's audience considered Hamlet a hero? This is one of the most eye-opening pieces of dramaturgy I've read. I discuss it, here: Marcus Geduld's answer to What is the meaning of "the slings and arrows of outrageous fortune"?Pick this up used if you can. It's expensive new.Shakespeare's Metrical Art: George T. Wright.If you want to understand what Shakespeare was doing poetically, this is the bible. If you're new to blank verse, I recommend your read "Thinking Shakespeare" before tackling this.I delve into lots of other Shakespearean issues, here: Directing "Hamlet".FictionI gobble down fiction, so if this question was "What are some great novels?" I could list hundreds of books. Ones that would definitely make the list are "Sense and Sensibility," "Pride and Prejudice," "Emma," "Wuthering Heights," "House of Mirth", "One Hundred Years of Solitude," "Watership Down," "Cat's Eye", "Bleak House," "Lonesome Dove," "Catcher in the Rye," "The Queen's Gambit," and ... well, I could go on and on.While all great novels expand my mind, I've included two, below, that did so via formal experimentation. In general, I hate experimental novels. Most of them are Sophomoric: "What if the author was a character in his own work? What if the characters knew the were living in a work of fiction? Like, wow men! Cool!"Here are two exceptions:1Q84: Haruki Murakami, Jay Rubin, Philip ­Gabriel.War and Peace: Leo Tolstoy.And this, to me and many others, is the greatest novel of all time:The Great Gatsby: F. Scott Fitzgerald.I've read it over a hundred times and it still keeps giving. Several famous writers, like Hemmingway, copied it out by hand, so that they could study each sentence. I've often thought of doing the same thing. Here's a lesson I learned from just one of Fitzgerald's sentences: PostUPDATE: Someone recently PMed me, asking me to recommend two fiction and two non-fiction books to him. What follows is my reply, in which I cheated and recommend more. It's interesting to compare the following list with the one above, and see how some books have a stable placement in the front of my mind while others shift.As a lifelong reader, it's almost impossible for me to pick four books without doing so at random, but I'll try, as long as you understand these aren't my four favorites. They're just four books that are meaningful to me chosen somewhat arbitrarily.I'm going pick books that I first read at least five years ago, because I want to give you recommendations that haven't just temporarily dazzled me. Otherwise, I'd suggest"Thinking, Fast and Slow" by Daniel KahnemanAmazon: Thinking, Fast and Slowand"Antifragile" by Nassim Nicholas TalebAmazon: Antifragile: Things That Gain from Disorderwhich both struck me as deeply profound and deeply useful. But they're too recent to be "canonized" in my mind.Finally, my favorite novel is"The Great Gatsby" by F. Scott FitzgeraldAmazon: The Great Gatsbybut I won't list it, because it's on so many great-works list. It's probably more helpful for me to suggest books you're less-likely to have heard about.Non-fiction:- "The Ghost Map: The Story of London's Most Terrifying Epidemic--and How It Changed Science, Cities, and the Modern World," by Steven Johnson, is a book about one event in history (and a fascinating one), but it manages to delve into deep matters of philosophy, science, and psychology, too. It's very exciting and readable, like a "page-turner" novel.Amazon: The Ghost Map- "From Dawn to Decadence: 500 Years of Western Cultural Life 1500 to the Present," by Jacques Barzun. The best modern-Western history I've ever read.Amazon: From Dawn to DecadenceFiction:- "Lonesome Dove," by Larry McMurtry, is, to me, a Great American Novel. It belongs on shelves next to "The Great Gatsby," "Moby Dick," and "The Scarlet Letter." It's a quest story, similar in that sense to "Lord of the Rings," but its setting is the American West in 1876.Amazon: Lonesome Dove- "Cat's Eye," by Margaret Atwood, is one of the most brutally-honest stories about childhood ever written. It's "Lord of the Flies" without the the island. And it's about little girls instead of little boys.Amazon: Cat's Eye: Margaret AtwoodHere are some other books I love:Fiction:- "One Hundred Years of Solitude," by Gabriel Garcia Marquez. Magic Realism. Maybe the best fantasy novel ever written. Marquez creates an absolutely unique world that runs via its own surreal logic. You emerge from it a different person. The English translation is gorgeous.Amazon: One Hundred Years of Solitude- "1Q84," by Haruki Murakami is the Japanese "One Hundred Year of Solitude." It's worth reading both of them, to understand what fiction can do and where it can go—and how it can play by its own rules.Amazon: 1Q84- "House of Mirth," by Edith Wharton. A fantastic portrait of 19th-Century New York and a young woman who has to maneuver in that complex, suffocating society.Amazon: The House of Mirth- "The Queens Gambit," by Walter Tevis is simply a perfect tale. It's like a masterclass on how to write a honed but unpretentious novel. It's about a child chess prodigy. Tevis isn't a well-known guy, but many people are aware of his novels via their film adaptations. These include "The Man Who Fell to Earth," "The Hustler," and "The Color of Money."Amazon: The Queen's Gambit: A Novel- "This Perfect Day," by Ira Levin is, in my mind, the best dystopia ever written. Few agree with me, because its politics are naive compared to books like "1984" (which I also love). But Levin isn't playing politics. Nor is he doing social criticism. He's weaving a yarn, and his spare prose and world-building do just that with immense confidence. I'd say it's one of the best sci-fi books of all time. Levin's mystery "A Kiss Before Dying" is also terrific. Don't watch either of the movie versions.Amazon: This Perfect Day- "Amy and Isabelle," by Elizabeth Strout is the best story about a mother/daughter relationship I've ever read.Amazon: Amy and Isabelle- "The Box of Delights," by John Masefield is my favorite children's fantasy novel. Though not nearly as well-known as "The Hobbit" or the Narnia books, for my taste it's superior.Amazon: The Box of DelightsOther novels I love include "Wuthering Heights" by Emily Bronte; "The Time Machine" and "The Island of Dr. Moreau" by H.G. Wells; "Emma," "Sense and Sensibility," and "Pride and Prejudice" by Jane Austen; pretty much any Jeeves book by P.G. Wodehouse; "Bleak House" by Charles Dickens; "Plain Song" by Ken Haruf; "Huckleberry Finn" by Mark Twain; "War and Peace" by Leo Tolstoy; "Catcher in the Rye" by J.D. Salinger; "To Kill a Mockingbird" by Harper Lee; and "Secret History" by Donna Tartt.Non-fiction:- "Godel, Escher, Bach," and "Fluid Concepts and Creative Analogies," by Douglas Hoffstadter, two of the most thought-provoking books I've read about the human mind and artificial intelligence.Amazon: Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden BraidAmazon: Fluid Concepts And Creative Analogies- "Shadow Divers," by Robert Kurson is the most exciting non-fiction book I've ever read. It's about deep-sea divers, a subject that (prior to reading this book) didn't interest me in the slightest.Amazon: Shadow Divers- "The Botany of Desire," by Michael Pollan is about the symbiotic way humans live with plants. Pollan is better known for "The Omnivore's Dilemma," which is fantastic, but, for my money, not quite as much the masterpiece as this earlier book.Amazon: The Botany of Desire- "Against Joie De Vivre" and "Being With Children," by Phillip Lopate. Lopate is the best personal essayist of the 20th Century and one of the best of all times.Amazon: Against Joie de VivreAmazon: Being with Children- Essays by George Orwell. I love all of Orwell's writing, but I find his essays—especially "Shooting an Elephant" and "Such, Such Were the Joys" to be the best of his writing.Amazon: Essays Free, online: http://gutenberg.net.au/ebooks03/0300011h.html- "How Children Fail," by John Holt; "Summerhill School," by A.S. Neal; "A Mathematician's Lament" by Paul Lockhart; and the much more recent "Wounded by School," by Kristin Olson, were all deeply important to forming and informing my ideas about education.Amazon: How Children FailAmazon: A Mathematician's LamentFree online (shorter) version (pdf): http://mysite.science.uottawa.ca/mnewman/LockhartsLament.pdfAmazon: Summerhill SchoolAmazon: Wounded by School- "The Little Schemer," by Daniel Friedman and Matthias Felleisen, is the only computer-programming book I've read that's a work of art. (Really it's a puzzle book, since one doesn't need to use a computer to work through it. It explores the subject of recursion.)Amazon: The Little Schemer- "In the Blink of an Eye" by Walter Murch, about the art of film editing.Amazon: In the Blink of an EyeFacebook: Friends of ol' marcus

I really want to know how the evidence of ring theory can be considered “solid.” Bring this topic up anywhere on the internet and somebody will say those exact words without fail: “the evidence is solid.”The whole thing is an invention of confirmation bias. The theory ignores contrary evidence, yet is willing to find authorial intent in even the most generic of similarities. It starts with a bold and unlikely conclusion, then takes the films apart and moves the scenes around on the living room floor until it fits into that theory.For example, Klimo connects the two ends of the ring — Episodes I and VI — by comparing their opening shots: A starship enters the frame heading toward a destination, cut to people inside the ship monitoring their approach on a video display, cut to exterior shot of ship entering destination, cut to interior shot of the ship coming to rest.Now look at the first five shots of Star Trek: The Motion Picture.What! Is this part of the ring too?!Without even comparing the shots you should already be suspicious of Klimo's claim: LOTS of sci-fi movies start with a spaceship arriving some place. In fact, lots of regular movies start with the arrival of a vehicle, followed by shots of the people inside that vehicle. It's just a natural, albeit sort of uninspired, way to visually begin story. Granted, I conveniently decided to stop the comparison when the Phantom Menace’s ship enters the dock; but this is true to Klimo’s own method, which omitted the very first shot in Return of the Jedi because it didn't match his thesis. Episode I starts like this:Episode VI starts like this:Klimo's analysis is full of equally dubious similarities. When Jarjar eats something he shouldn't, is that a deliberate allusion to Chewbacca's taking the bait in the Ewoks' trap? More likely just an obvious joke, that an animal-like alien sidekick has trouble with impulse control. Is Obi-Wan's "sensing" a villain's presence a subtextual link to Darth's sensing Obi-Wan aboard the Death Star? It's something that happens several times in all three original movies — usually just as an easy excuse for Darth Vader to know where Luke is when none of the other bad guys do.With the alleged plot similarities, all Klimo did was creatively paraphrase the events of the films. For example, here's how he describes the second acts of Clones and Empire:Anakin escorts Padme to safety, off planet—where they fall in love.Han escorts Leia to safety, off planet—where they fall in love.I guess Han could be said to "escort Leia to safety, off planet." Or, you could be more specific and say Han and Leia flee a battle together and fall in love while hiding from a pursuing enemy fleet. Or, you could be more vague and say that two clashing personalities brought together by fate eventually admit their love for each other. That would include the second act of Star Trek II, The African Queen, and pretty much every "reluctant lovers" story ever.Even if we accept everything Klimo says as fact, what's the end result? What is the “greater purpose?” Klimo says it’s less of a message, more of a statement: the two trilogies represent cosmic opposites, evil and good, yin and yang.One cannot exist without the other, thus the two are interdependent. For example, light cannot exist without darkness and vice versa. . . [T]he universe and everything in it is interconnected and there are no absolutes.I guess that recalls the wisdom of Lao Tzu. But not nearly as much as it recalls the wisdom of literally every person I have ever smoked pot with.Star Wars ring theory is bad film criticism.

Formula from Feb 2, 2013. Skip below the bullet points to find the actual content. These first parts are notes.((Main Principle: Exponential efficiency.))Overview: Nathan Coppedge's answer to What are the best examples of deductive reasoning?(Note: How Nathan Coppedge does not use logical fallacies)CONJECTURE: If a systematic argument is made which is embodied in the consistent logic of all arguments in a system, then if the argument is universally valid (sometimes also potentially meaning sound), no proper argument made by the system is ever absolutely contradictory.Things that share a category cannot be diagonally opposed in this system, and diagonally opposed categories are the only type of actual opposites. Another way to look at this is opposites must be completely unrelated, not sharing ANY categories. For example, if two people can talk or breathe, that alone makes them far more similar to eachother than they are to a tree. But a tree is also not opposite of humans, because it is also a form of biological life.Nihilism and The Theory of Everything (a kind of post-op from years later)Limitations of SystemsHas philosophy explained all of reality?What makes a theory a good theory?Universal Universe / Coherent SpaceWhat are the post-infinitism of meta-axioms?Evaluating semantic connotationRe: Jim Farned on Epistemological Questions: Is there anything not defined in your epistemology (questions)? There could be. As far as these (questions or other writings) they are not an exclusive list. I sometimes try to make exclusive lists, but they are efforts not perfections, and they often adopt a particular theme to narrow their range of applicability.Circular reasoning seems to be a concern for some people. Notes on circular reasoning: Some systems [such as this one] may also use iteration without assuming any additional content with more cycles, or without assuming the cycle is what proves the system. Look for an axiomatic structure in logical cases, or if that seems inadvisable try to determine what the real content is. --Nathan Coppedge's answer to How do you measure circular reasoning?More assistance: Octopus and Garlic Two Separate ExamplesFor certain arguments: anthropology without consistent insight looks smaller than the system proposed, and anthropology is larger than race and many other individual concerns.How do we know a concept contains the understanding in thinking making up the idea?Objective truth, basis to analyze: Space, observations of phenomena, logical relationships, data representation priorities.I also think the metaphysics is not all language, although language is the usual method of description. Language is disposable but life should not be disposable.Opposites and Universals… Truth Architecture = Proportional categories, Relative Absoluteness. (Relative relativism = absoluteness). --> The principle here is infinity is already used up by the ideas of coherence (infinity) and opposites (numbers), therefore it is more accurate to call proportional numbers proportional categories.MAIN TEXT:VIDEO:(Source: Coppedge, made with a Youtube video editor that no longer exists).[Coherent Systems A.1.A.1.]Although checked by formal assumptions, categorical deduction differs from the methods of Aristotle by avoiding the unnecessary idea that paradoxes must be solved by laborious deconstruction. Instead, paradoxes are formally deconstructed as consisting of opposing contradictions, solutions, and problems. If a paradox is not contradictory in some way, it cannot be a problem. Thus, paradoxes cannot be any more contradictory than contradictory opposites. If that is the case, then every contradiction is contained by the measurement of all opposites, and so because it is unnecessary to exclude any contradiction, it is no longer necessary to balance unknowns. It follows from this that causal inference systems including the methods of science may be effectively shooting themselves in the foot as far as coherent data.—Nathan Coppedge's answer to Is philosophy in general based on circular arguments?Categorical deduction is a method I invented for formulating coherent knowledge using an n-dimensional typology. For most purposes it only operates in four square categories ('quadra') lying inside a bounded Cartesian Coordinate System ('axes').Deductions are produced when opposite terms or labels, each being of any length, and occupying separate boxes, are arranged to form statements that are said to express all the data that could be expressed----because the words are analogous to everything contained by the concepts.The words must be opposites opposed along the diagonal, and arranged with an order preference given to categories A and B, which are taken to be the subject of the individual analysis.Coherent statements are then expressed as "AB:CD and AD:CB" in terms of A.Here is an Informal Opposites List that might be used. Also, here is a sense of how to form opposites coherently which importantly differs from the norm: Coherent Opposites and a manifesto ABSOLUTELY AGAINST any form of color bias: Opposite Color Identity And see also: How do people misapply knowledge?Since B and D are switched as part of the operation of the deduction, the preference of B over D is actually unnecessary, although the content is not arbitrary, as it expresses a certain relation of judgment axis B-D with judgment axis A-C.In case you need to know why it is NOT a conventional truth tableExceptions to the system:2nd Type of System (1st alternative): Naive realism: A system that makes no assumption and makes no claim might be said to make fewer assumptions.3rd Type of System (2nd alternative): Paradoxes: Some conclusions of the system might not be valid if they can be contradicted even if they are true.4th Type of System (3rd alternative): Irrationality: If we are allowed to make claims that are unreasonable, we can resist logical deductions.5th Type of System (4th alternative): Incoherentism: If we do not require coherence, what is true may refer to something very specific, and only specific things might be relevant to solving a problem. In that case, very technical information might be more relevant to a problem and there may be efficient ways of reaching for the exact technical information which do not require balanced universality.6th Type of System (5th alternative): Equivalent Neutral Systems: some systems which are arguably also absolutely fair and balanced, like zero, could be seen as not being refuted in any way by the system, and thus have a kind of immunity to the conclusions and could be seen as equivalent. However, not many such systems exist (mostly just zero or nothing or everything or all somethings or a coherent explanation of everything, etc, unless we adopt some technical assumptions). Begrudgingly I have called some arguments based on desire neutral systems because they often work from the perspective of assuming a logical system cannot be relevant, when in fact if it makes fair arguments it can be relevant regardless of desire. This is why emotional arguments usually go under irrationality. Saying / arguing that some parts of logical arguments fail just because those parts are irrelevant to you does not prove that no part is relevant or that the whole system is universally irrelevant. Maybe it's possible the system aims to do something good, or perhaps you don't understand how neutral it is. If there is something wrong with the system it may be something attached at random that has little to do with what it logically means. Care should be taken by everyone not to use the system in an unfair way, which is pretty much any use outside of philosophy and balanced computer science.7th Type of System (6th alternative): Informal Methods: certain informal-type ideas and systems may be better at their specific job, but make no claim at coherence, and thus make no claim to refuting the deductions, much like incoherentism, but without making any kind of formal truth claim, or they would become either coherent or incoherent or fall into other groups.8th Type of System (7th alternative) has been rejected under the argument that relativism means measurement, the alternatives being infinitely absolute or else assuming everything is mathematics, which are untrue if we assume relativism is universal. Therefore relativism is not absolute or can be measured, which are equivalent unless relativism is finite. Thus there is a window for absolutism expressed in the idea of measuring relativism. The argument further claims that measurement and relativism aee equivalent, and thus this type of system is not coherently necessary. Relativism itself may be rejected because double-relativism = absolutism, and where there are alternatives to relativism, there are alternatives to relativism.9th Type of System (8th alternative), is nonsensical types of systems. A complex argument says these reduce to the Principle of Non-Contradiction, which was foundational in Aristotle’s incoherent forms of inference.10th Type of System (9th alternative) is a so-called impossible system. Although normally impossibility suggests impossibility, with a flexible definition impossibility may in rare cases be used as a higher standard of some system.Examples that don't work:"Bad women make good men." You may think this is sound reasoning, but it does not logically follow, because if man is the opposite of woman, they cannot both be human. The opposite of human is at least not human.Examples that might work:A problem case is for example, saying Philosophy is Bad at Unphilosophical Goodness, but to think this doesn’t work we have to assume that we cannot be good at being un-philosophical, in other words, that philosophy is good and un-philosophical is bad, which is the same as saying the case presented is impossible and therefore irrelevant. Therefore, within assumptions, even cases like this are valid, either by meeting assumptions like un-philosophical can be good, or meeting cases like impossible cases are irrelevant. You see, if we assume philosophy is always good, we must also assume this particular case is impossible, and therefore there is no contradiction, within assumptions. The deductions still show all the options that are possible within all possible assumptions (except for exceptions to the whole system, for those, see above).Examples that do work:However, you could argue bad is the opposite of good, and the opposite of love is hate, now you can conclude that "bad hate makes good love." What we mean by this is what is bad at being hate (what exists a hate, and is bad at such existence) is also good at being love. This is true, because the alternative is contradictory, if for no other reason. The more we are bad at hate, the more we are good at love. What is fascinating is it applies to any such example without contradiction or unfairness.It is logically sound, because it serves as a definition, and we know that it is not contradictory. Of course, other types of exceptions still exist which restrain the ultimate significance both of good and bad, and of love and hate. The statement does not say that it is true in every possible way, but only that it is a logically true definition which measures the extent of validity for that exact case, insofar as the words are accurate representations. In other words, we do not know that the words are objective, but if we assume they are, it works to measure one-degree coherence, or a better system should be proposed.If we want it to be empirically true however, this raises some questions, because just because we have an objective apparatus does not mean we actually know how to measure the properties. Yet, the logical statements are true if we can measure even one degree.Of course, unless the statement is referring to absolutes, it will not be absolutely coherent, which is only fair. Few people seem to know what ‘absolute’ means, anyway, and in that way it is helpful to have any definition at all.Using similar rules, we can make more complex statements that are equally valid, such as: "good problems with hate produce bad solutions in love." Although more entities are involved, the statements still do not have to assume the entities are real or measurable to be logically valid. You see, the only thing contradicting anything is its opposite, or some specific physical or metaphysical idea, if we assume physics and metaphysics is what's real. The deductions also don't depend on the idea of cause and effect, hence the concept of 'non-causal inference'.Consider the example of beauty versus ugliness, and a sensitive person versus a stoic. We don't argue that any of these entities or qualities don't exist for some person or other. Now, we can't compare opposites directly because that would create a contradiction. So, we compare non-opposites. There is no rule which says that stoics can't be ugly, or that sensitive people can't be beautiful or ugly, etc. In fact, the only thing that would contradict sensitivity is being stoical, and the only thing that would contradict beauty is ugliness. (The only exception to this is irrationality).Now, we are not saying that stoic and sensitivity or beauty and ugliness cannot be compared to other things, so there is no contradiction in selecting something specific. At this point there is no contradiction. We are comparing non-opposites, because that is not contradictory. It is a possibility, so it can express something about the world. Since the concepts can be defined as the only words that represent the exact same concept, or the identical concepts are interchangeable and have only one opposite, therefore the comparison of non-opposites represents the only available knowledge on whatever topic the terms concern. Since it is the only available knowledge, it is the best knowledge, and where opposite terms are exclusive of all possible descriptions, it is also universal knowledge. Now it follows that 'a beautiful stoic is ugly sensitively' and, under different conditions, 'an ugly stoic is beauty-sensitive'. Otherwise, the terms are not opposites, the process is resolved differently, the interpretation is naive realist, or there is a paradox, irrationality, or incoherence. In sheerly objective terms the only exceptions I know of are naive realism, paradoxes, irrationality, and incoherence. There are also several other trivial exceptions, such as when formal tools are rejected out of hand, or when an informal tool is assumed to be more important.What is potentially unique about the system is not just its sense of double relativism which I call relative absoluteness, but the way it works across language, and for any extreme concept.For GENERAL ASSUMPTIONS OF RELATED SYSTEMS, SEE: Can logic be wrong? Why? FOR AN ATTEMPTED PROOF OF THE SPECIFIC SYSTEM, SEE: Can philosophy be axiomatized? (An ‘early edition’ of the assumptions is given here, yielding only eight assumptions instead of ten or more: Assumptions of Coherentism / Categorical Deduction 2016/06/05).However, things like 'cat and dog' or 'man and woman' don't work except in what is called a 'modal sense'. The modal sense is the same sense as 'this lamp post to that street over there' --- it may not in fact be opposite. However, terms like cat and dog can be lumped into categories like animal and human, and opposites can be imagined for them, like 'dead human' and maybe 'nativity water' for 'alien flame' or the like. These sorts of concepts at least set up a relationship for logical comparison coherently, providing a meaningful standard for correspondence that was not previously imaginable outside of science fiction and Alien Phenomenology.APPLIED TO THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING:And when difference must be added to the diagonally opposite efficiency there are really only two combinations for the whole universe:BCAD or DCAB AND (CDBA or ADBC) AND DACB or BACD AND (ABDC or CBDA)ORBCAD or DCAB AND (ABDC or CBDA) AND DACB or BACD AND (CDBA or ADBC)…This may help, from the Function Spectrum TheoremMain scores as in diagram assuming Correctly Eff +/- 1, Diff +/- 1 or 0Reactive Mechanisms (Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max 6, Min 5Antiforce Mechanisms (Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max 5, Min 4Supported Flying Machines (Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max 4, Min 3Self-Powered Flying Machines (Eff + Eff + Diff) Max 3, Min 2Perpetual Motion (Eff + Diff) Max 2, Min 1Zero (Eff)Human Knowledge (Eff + Diff) Max 0, Min -1Languages (Eff + Eff + Diff) Max -1, Min -2Immortal Languages (Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max -2, Min -3Draconian Networks (Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max -3, Min -4Archaic Networks (Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Eff + Diff) Max -4, Min -5…KEY CRITICISM:Parallels have been drawn with:And above thus so below.A perpetual motion machine.“It remains to be seen whether labelled systems can be [interpreted] in a general way in terms of display or hypersequent formalisms.” —Sara Negri, Proof theory for modal logic, p. 12, (https://www.mv.helsinki.fi/home/negri/ptml_final.pdf)More about exceptions:Definition Etc. of Naive RealismDefinition of ParadoxesDefinition of IrrationalityDefinition of IncoherentismDefinition of NeutralityDefinition of Informalism…A major argument on absoluteness may be found here: An Argument for Absolute KnowledgeThere's a possibly simpler explanation here: Knowledge of CategoriesFor additional clarifications that link back, see: Nathan Coppedge's answer to Is it possible to reach the absolute truth?A larger group of systems may be found here (and also linked on my profile): Coherent Systems TheoryA shortlist of useful systems may be found here: Programmable Heuristics( Part of the answer to the question of true knowledge: What is true knowledge? )……Posted as ‘PhiLight’ at:Now I Know: Brain Uploads Downloads by Nathan CoppedgeHISTORICAL NOTES:The writing presumably on matrices at: Spectral theory - Wikipedia is similar, with different connotations:The inverse of an operator T, that is T −1, is defined by: [math]{\displaystyle TT^{-1}=T^{-1}T=I.} [/math]If the inverse exists, T is called regular. If it does not exist, T is called singular. With these definitions, the resolvent set of T is the set of all complex numbers ζ such that Rζ exists and is bounded. This set often is denoted as ρ(T). The spectrum of T is the set of all complex numbers ζ such that R ζ fails to exist or is unbounded.End of Wikipedia quote.…The idea of disproving a lemma may have been the original idea of a problem, i.e. ‘probing a lemma’: “(Lemma: Any system that uses measure will conquer relativism by its own standard, if it has a standard)… With coherence, there is a tendency, as in Aristotle, to answer in terms of ‘yes’ and ‘no’, although it often takes the form of a temporary diversion in the form of a moment similar to a waiting room in which the occupant is diverted through a complex menu system… The output is not random, but rather indeterminate, too complex to be judged by the existing standard… You see, the complex menu is a contingency (in my vocabulary, a perpendicularity) to the actual, ambiguous condition, which effectively reads *the same*. Thus we have a quandary of what is happening in the waiting room. [From this we can proceed to the idea that: 1. Not all is limited, 2. All is mathematics, OR 3. Relativism can be measured]. In infinitely absolute terms however, we can reject the first option, and the second option is clearly untrue if we are being reasonable. [For example, the concept of infinity would disprove limits and vice versa. And, besides, mathematics does not have qualia.]” —The Undecided Exception (…)…Some trace this sort of objective thought to George Boole, however a better source might be Nietzsche, clarified by Y Yang’s thought from around Dec 31, 2001 that if M.C. Escher were made into a paradox, it would solve all problems. This statement may have also been a hallucination or imagining by Nathan Coppedge.Nietzsche’s relevant quote is:"Anyone who has felt [the] ... cool breath [of logic] will hardly believe even the concept--which is bony, foursquare, and as transposable as a die--is nevertheless merely the residue of a metaphor..." --Nietzsche, On Truth and Lies in Nonmoral SenseTraces of this kind of thought are also found in Johann Lichtenberg, Novalis, Heidegger, and even Kant, and perhaps from what I have read, Hegel. However, Nietzsche’s statement is the clearest of these earlier thinkers. Heidegger’a Fourfold Dasein does not appear to be the same thing. And the logical foursquare is a different method that looks like a popular misapplication of what became clear in my work.If there is an epiphany moment it might have occurred sometime in 2013 when I wrote down the pattern after dreaming of an Oroboros. I wanted to give more distinction to future editions of The Dimensional Philosopher’s Toolkit, which had been published in late 2012 without the method.TOE Over-Unity Rating: 1(2 ^ 2 > 4 - 1)—Over-Unity Formula for TOEs (…)Place in History Reference:1. Information / semantic model --> 2. Psychological / spiritual model --> 3. Reproductive / metaphysical model --> 4. Historical / virtual model --> 5. Scientific / humanist model --> 6. Historical / greatness model --> 7. Ethical / profile model --> 8. Spiritual / ascendant model --> 9. Base humanity model --> 10. Corrupt humanness model --> 11. Flavor virtue model --> 12. International tropes model --> 13. Ideas in history model --> 14. Science and ritual model --> 15. Spiritual history model --> 16. Understanding history with some flares model --> 17. In service of a daemon model --> 18. Writing on the wall (sublique messages) model --> 19. In service of the wonders of man model --> 20. Ideas of anthropos model --> 21. Mystery model --> 22. Babyl model --> 23. Written significance model --> 24. Great Chinese model --> 25. Authentic living model --> 26. Meaningful problem model --> 27. Original invention model --> 28. Popular salesmanship model --> 29. Introduced to great wealth model --> 30. Mysterious significance model --> 31. Arcane studies model --> 32. Early science / great possibilities model --> 33. Magic moment / disappointment model --> 34. Special research / confusion model --> 35. Failed descriptive theory model -----> 36. Coherent model [Level: 1] --> (…Back to beginning).—Place in History Reference (…)INVENTOR'S PRIORITY: 1/10Abstract. New names / disciplines. <--Physical inventions.Political ideas.Physical or abstract orgsnization.Names of places / historical ideas.Logistics techniques.Strategies / insights.Modes / styles.New manufacturing techniques / New industries.Magic / subtle esse.…[4.34]Place in Ideas Reference (…)…Metaphysical Hints ScoreEverything is a little bit sublime.Everything exists.Everything aesthetic has potential to be perfect.Aesthetics is a reduced standard.What cannot be aesthetically perfect can be metaphysically perfect.When aesthetics is metaphysical, there is a double chance at perfection.Two degrees of perfection are what is necessary to achieve aesthetic perfection. <--The aesthetic is real, but it is not predictive.Metaphysics and aesthetics are ideally co-variant.If the aesthetic is formal, and the metaphysics informal, co-variance may create coherence.Aesthetically, anything with responsibility is intelligent.…FURTHER STUDIES: OBJECTIVE KNOWLEDGES MORE GENERALLY:Generally...|2 / D > results / verbs| = Possibility equation.1 / (ratio of numbers from equation) = new number.Now with knowledge...2 results 4 verbs, 2 dimensions.2 / 2 > 2 / 4 = 0.5 difference.1 / 0.5 = 2 Ontology of Everything rating for categorical deduction.New:2/ 8 > 6/8, diff = 4/88 dimensions, 6 results, 8 verbsCHART OF KNOWLEDGE2D 1 result 2 verbs2D 2 results 4 verbs2D 4 results 8 verbs2D 6 results 12 verbs2D 8 results 16 verbs4 D 1 result 2 verbs, etc.8 D 6 results 8 verbs8 D 12 results 16 verbs8 D 15 results 20 verbs16 D 5 results 8 verbs16 D 10 results 16 verbs16 D 15 results 24 verbsOntology of EverythingDifferent rating system:Souls per answers = 2 (coherence)---Over-Unity Formula for TOEs…MYTH AND LEGEND:IMPROVED PROBLEM OF THE WORLD-MAZE:Enchanted World (Exoteric, Esoteric, Empirical, Abstract) <-- Immortal Transformation (Physical, Mental, Spiritual) <-- Intuition (Mental-Physical) <-- Problem (Quadratic)…“ON THE DIMENSIONAL ENCYCLOPEDIA PROJECT” (March 26, 2013)It has been an eerie year for me in terms of intellectual progression. I have literally invented several disciplines to navigate what seemed to be very difficult territory. In some ways I'm still lost in the specificity of my project, even though the subject in its most meaningful form is highly general, and yet capable of insight. What began as a Unity Project dealing with subjectivity, God, objectivity, and the soul has morphosed into, first, a book of knowledge which has not been published, secondly my Theses folder which is mostly devoted to literature for which I cannot claim credit, although much of it I have not discovered in print, and thirdly my Dimensional Encyclopedia, the volumes of which will sometimes include disciplines which do not yet exist in the same sense with which I intend them.One of my encyclopedias is devoted to Paralogy, the philosophy of fractions, in a sense that builds on earlier volumes concerning such subjects as Philosophy, Psychology, Biology, Phenomenology, Aesthetics, and Criticism.I have continued my sometimes disappointing encounters with the published literature, where entire books frequently lack a strong thesis statement or fail to propound the wealth of insights that a strong thesis might suggest.As the year wears on (comfortably and uncomfortably), I muse on the strength of my own theses, theses which I have so far been approaching in the individual contexts of each encyclopedia. Yet the titles of future volumes meaningfully weigh into some of the content considerations. Paralogy has a meaningful presence in the beginning of my Phenomenology Toolkit (Dimensional Encyclopedia, Volume Four).It has been meaningful to address subjects which others have not cared to consider, and to ponder on combinations of subjects which yield meaningful variables.For example, in Psychology, it seems to me that the work of Freud on dreams, Otto Rank on Beyond Psychology, and Carl Rogers on individualized therapy offer inadequate concepts of meaning, even though meaning is a relatively fertile concept for study.Taking philosophy as an example of the completeness of knowledge, psychology gains an aura of incompleteness, but in providing this kind of sketch, meaningful holistics concur in the prediction of the ends and middles of theory…The way I have earlier reached for a Paroxysmic shift (in the Dimensional Philosopher's Toolkit), conversely I am currently struggling with the limitation of such categories as History and Politics, topics which I intend to eventually creatively address within later volumes of the encyclopedia. It requires a certain amount of psychic motivation to see that these subjects are still relevant to individual study. Why not go mad, as in the first volume, or become sane, as in the second volume, or acquire moodlessness, as in the third volume? Or transcend perspective, as in the fourth volume? Something of these subjects and their implied varaibles will remain to investigate in the later subjects, I promise.What about the scaffolds I connoted? I have provided hints. Dimensional Psychology is my current subject, the topic of my present work to be published next year. In the future, I will have an opportunity to apply psychology to such subjects as biology, phenomenology, aesthetics, criticism, and paralogy. The concept is an endless ladder.—Hints on Paradigms and Scaffolds (March 26, 2013)See also:Aristotle’s Causal InferenceTypologiesProofs of EverythingProof of the Existence of Polar OppositesWhat is the concept of infinite knowledge?Considering Any Strategic Disadvantages of CoherenceProgrammable HeuristicsDimensional Philosophy