What is the value of a belief that a fact is wrong (like cladistics and particle physics)?

If the truth is that conceptualization ends in paradox, as Bertrand Russell demonstrated it does (by Russell’s paradox), then what’s the value of a belief that this fact is wrong (ie, a believed denial), or even claim (assertion) or “empirical discovery” that it is wrong, like cladistics and particle physics. Is it actually possible to falsify Russell’s paradox?

If it is possible, does such falsification make reality paradoxical, although Russell’s paradox explains that it isn’t, but just that it is ambiguous (it just says that conceptualization ultimately ends in in paradox, not that reality is paradoxical). And, if it indeed makes reality paradoxical, is it then possible to say anything that is more sensible than anything else? Does it leave any possibility to distinguish truth from falsehood? What can possibly be true in a paradoxical world?

No, fact is that it is realists’ (eg, cladists and particle physicists) belief (claim, assertion and “empirical discovery”) that Russell’s paradox is wrong (ie, that reality is paradoxical instead of ambiguous) that is wrong. Reality is not paradoxical, but just ambiguous. Instead, it is reality’s goal that is paradoxical, just like realists’ goals (like finding “the true tree of life” or “Higgs particle”) are. Realists merely conflate reality with its goal by their fundamental conflation of process with pattern. To get out of this conflation, they have to understand that neither of us IS our properties, but just HAVE them. Properties change, but we don’t. In a fundamental sense, all of us remain the same even if our properties change. Our being is not tied to our properties. Realists thus have to turn their priorities up-side-down to arrive to a consistent approach, that is, nominalism.

The value of a belief that a fact (like Russell’s paradox) is wrong (ie, a believed denial), or even claim (assertion) or “empirical discovery” that it is wrong, like cladistics and particle physics, is thus nil (or nada as they say in Spanish). In English, the best concept for this realist package I can find is “crap”. It is crap that there is a “true tree of life” and it is crap that particle physicists have found “Higgs particle”. The sooner we understand this fact, the better.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s