O.G. Rose | The Map Is Indestructible (Part I) by O.G. Rose @O.G.Rose.Michelle.and.Daniel | Uploaded September 2024 | Updated October 2024, 4 hours ago.
As Kurt Gödel found mathematics and seemingly any self-referential system cannot make itself axiomatic or formal, so the same goes with all of thought. With Gödel, we can consider Alfred Korzybski, the brilliant challenger of Aristotelian thinker, who we might also associate with Hegel of the Science of Logic. Korzybski’s Science and Sanity attempts to help us recognize ‘mathematics as a language similar in structure to the world in which we live.’ Perhaps Korzybski succeeds in this, but if so, that would perhaps help the case of making Gödel’s work part of the world itself. And what would this mean? That we are always dealing with maps that are indestructible precisely because finding a point of incompleteness will not necessarily mean they are wrong: though the realization brings anxiety, “incompleteness” can benefit maps. If incompleteness is essentially part of every map, then finding maps incomplete will not necessarily overturn them. Far from necessarily relativizing them out of existence or into nihilism (though that can happen for some), the vulnerability can make the maps more invincible...
Substack:
ogrose.substack.com/p/the-map-is-indestructible-part-i
Medium:
o-g-rose-writing.medium.com/the-map-is-indestructible-part-i-48c3d9d266dd
Photo by Jonathan Körner
As Kurt Gödel found mathematics and seemingly any self-referential system cannot make itself axiomatic or formal, so the same goes with all of thought. With Gödel, we can consider Alfred Korzybski, the brilliant challenger of Aristotelian thinker, who we might also associate with Hegel of the Science of Logic. Korzybski’s Science and Sanity attempts to help us recognize ‘mathematics as a language similar in structure to the world in which we live.’ Perhaps Korzybski succeeds in this, but if so, that would perhaps help the case of making Gödel’s work part of the world itself. And what would this mean? That we are always dealing with maps that are indestructible precisely because finding a point of incompleteness will not necessarily mean they are wrong: though the realization brings anxiety, “incompleteness” can benefit maps. If incompleteness is essentially part of every map, then finding maps incomplete will not necessarily overturn them. Far from necessarily relativizing them out of existence or into nihilism (though that can happen for some), the vulnerability can make the maps more invincible...
Substack:
ogrose.substack.com/p/the-map-is-indestructible-part-i
Medium:
o-g-rose-writing.medium.com/the-map-is-indestructible-part-i-48c3d9d266dd
Photo by Jonathan Körner
