# The truth is…

The truth is that we can’t find a single unambiguous explanation of reality, because we can’t find a single unambiguous classification of reality.

It means that there isn’t any rational alternative to religion. Rationality can manipulate reality, but not explain it, sorry to say. And, this shortcoming is not due to that reality is incomprehensible, but that it is incomprehensible to us.

### 3 responses to “The truth is…”

1. dimvisionary

Perhaps there are two explanations, one corresponding to the physical and one corresponding to the metaphysical. I feel you are correct about the lack of a rational alternative to religion and that seems to be a clue that religion is not rational. Humans are not entirely rational, either. Thanks, Mats!

• menvall

The problem is that “explanation” ultimately ends in paradox, namely Russell’s paradox (because classification ultimately ends in paradox). It means that the end of our rational journey to explain reality is a turning point – the paradox we call Russell’s paradox. (This gives meat on the bones on T S Eliot’s statement that “we shall never cease from exploration, and the end of all our exploring will be to arrive where we started and know the place for the first time”.) The rational journey to explain reality is actually an orthogonal circle.

This fact turns “explanation” into explanation of how “explanation” turns around at this paradox. This explanation, in turn, requires understanding of linear algebra. In an orthogonal system (as conceptualization), there are three fundamental components: one property, the opposite property and the middle between them, eg, white, black and gray. The problem to use such a system for “explanation” is that the middle (eg, gray) is ambiguous, because it means that the system lacks a middle, but instead disappears into infinity where the middle should be (ie, Russell’s paradox). The target for “explanation” is in practice a running point.

It means that rational reasoning is limited to modeling reality and comparing the models with reality. Explaining reality is simply impossible, actually a paradox, but which does not mean that reality IS a paradox, as cladists and particle physicists erroneously believe, but just that rational reasoning ends in paradox.

“What reality is” can we thus never find out. It is what it is, end of the chapter.

• dimvisionary

Thanks, Mats. Nice explanation of the problem with the word explanation. And I can only agree with your findings, doctor.