INTRODUCTION

  The greatest intellectual achievement of mortal humans is the creation of new, viable logical / mathematical / philosophical systems. Those who create such systems are immortalized as the greatest thinkers of our species: Aristotle, Lully, Newton, Boole, Derrida, to name but a few. Their names appear on products everywhere; their ideas are pounded into the heads of schoolchildren everywhere; their fame is immortal.

  YOU can join this illustrious company by devising your own system of logic, of philosophy, of mathematics, of thought. Here is a step-by-step process that will help you get your name chiseled into stone on large buildings and monuments and applied to funny cartoon characters. You may also gain increased access to food, sexual partners, and video games. Just do the following:

HOW TO DO IT

1. Decide on the purpose / goal(s) of your system. Logical / philosophical / mathematical systems are usually used to create models of something or other. (Deciding on what you wish to model is covered below in the scope / subject(s) section.) Systems are usually intended to promote some end - intellectual, ideological, temporal, physical. Some such ends may include:
   
   
   1. Knowledge or belief - see KNOWLEDGE VS. BELIEF
   2. Theological power - see START YOUR OWN RELIGION
   3. Political power - see CLASS- AND CULTURAL-WAR
   4. Intellectual self-abuse - see MENTAL MASTURBATION
   5. Sheer fun - see THUS: The LOGICAL PROOF Game
   6. Random thinking or whatever - click I'M FEELING LUCKY
   
   
   
2. Decide on the polarity / complexity and the granularity / density of your system. Huh? What are those? Ok, here's what I mean by these terms:
   
   

   Polarity / complexity refers to the number of possible logical states ('poles') in your system. Many popular systems are binary: good/evil, true/false, on/off, etc. But zero-to-infinite numbers of states are possible. Some possibilities include:

   
   0:   Null. Nada. Nada damn thing. Nothing is. Never. Kablooie.
   1:   Unity. Complete unification. Everything is. Always. Zowie.
     NOTE: The above systems are very simple, straight-forward, easily-understood.
   2:   Binary. Everything either is or isn't, and are absolutely differentiated. This or that. Either-or. True-false. Good-bad. On-off. Black-white. Boring...
     NOTE: The above systems all provide for absolute control of outcomes.
   
   The following systems usually provide more accurate depictions of reality.
   3:   Trinary, i.e. good / bad / indifferent, or hot / medium / cold, or straight / gay / bisexual.
   4+   More, maybe MANY MANY more, but finite - see THE JAIN DOCTRINE OF MAYBE, EXTENDED
   n+   Infinite (uncountable) - such as the possible excuses for avoiding sex.
   

   NOTE: The 0- and 1-states listed above derive from the dynamic nature of time, wherein everything changes, nothing remains constant. Because nothing is constant, there can be no states at all: 0. Or, because everything is ever-changing, the only possible state is that of becoming: 1. It's only logical.

   NOTE: A 3-state logic may be expressed as in digital electronics: high (1), low (0), or ground (off). Or as in Motie thought: on this hand, on that hand, or on the gripping hand (strongest argument). All n-state logics may be configured in numerous ways.

   Granularity / density refers to the amount of logical space in between the possible states or poles. This is also referred to as 'fuzziness'. For instance, a binary system may be low-granular, high-density (black-white); or medium-granular, medium-density (shades of gray); or high-granular, low-density (shades of gray tending towards an infinity of color); or whatever. Plug this directly into your optical system, if any.

   
   
   
3. Decide on the geometry / topology of your system. Your logic may be: pointillistic, linear, flat, circular, twisted, multi-faceted, concave, convex, perforated, zero-to-infinitely multi-dimensional, imploded, exploded, self-swallowing, infinite or finite or infinitesimal, expanding or stable or contracting, gas- or water- or bean-filled, ever-changing, etc.

   NOTE: This geometry determines many of the other aspects of your system — just about everything else that's listed here. Your entire system is based on its geometry, its shape, its basic topological characteristics, its swoops and swirls and angularity and tastes and dimensionality. Don't fock it up, or you WON'T achieve intellectual immortality — you'll just be remembered (if at all) as some munghead with limited vision. You putz!

   
   
4. Decide on the scope / subject(s) of your system. You may wish to deal with one or more of the following, or with something else entirely:
   
   
   • Everything and/or Nothing, etc.
   • Stuff that is and/or isn't observable, etc.
   • Stuff that is and/or isn't conscious, etc.
   • Stuff that is and/or isn't communicative, etc.
   • Stuff that is and/or isn't real and/or abstract, etc.
   • Stuff that can and/or can't be conceptualized, discussed, etc.
   • Stuff that is and/or isn't stuff, etc.
   • All other stuff and/or non-stuff, etc.

   You may also wish to determine the clarity / opacity of your subjects. That is, some subjects may be clearly illuminated by your system; others may be partially susceptible to examination; still others may be totally impenetrable. Structure your system accordingly.

   
   
5. Decide on the rules / operations of your system. Your system will be, in object-oriented programming terms, an object — that is, 1) a set of information, and 2) a set of rules for manipulating and transforming that information. The operations specify what manipulations of objects in your system are allowable. The rules specify how and when logical materials are to be manipulated, created or destroyed, augmented or diminished, constructed or deconstructed, smoothed or crumpled or twisted or flayed alive. To keep track of the rules / operations etc, you may wish to:
   
   
   1. List all the possible rules and operations; and
   2. List all the possible applications of those rules and operations; then
   3. Create a table showing which rules and operations are valid in which applications and circumstances, in conjunction with each other and with all possible inputs to your system, at what times and places, and with what exclusions and wildcards.

   You may find this suitable for implementation as a spreadsheet on your computer. Or you may just be totally arbitrary regard to rules and operations, but then who'll give a shit about you or your alleged 'system'?

   NOTE: Some people have a great fondness for devices and tables that automatically implement logic systems. The combinational logic machines of Lully and Laputa are especially prized by collectors. You may wish to design your logic for such automata, and vice-versa. See Martin Gardner's LOGIC MACHINES AND DIAGRAMS for help here.

   
   
6. Decide on the representation / notation(s) of your system. You may communicate the precepts of your system any combination of means: alphanumeric / symbolic, graphic / diagrammatic, verbal / musical, chemical / pheromonal, mental / psychic, or any other media. Or you may wish that your system be totally uncommunicative, but you'll find it harder to attain lasting fame if you choose that route. Unless you can find a way to sell your "aura of mystery"...

   NOTE: Some of the greatest systems of all time have been expressed as diagrams in mud or sand or dung, as crayon images on shopping bags, as objects (or bodies) scattered around on beaches or asphalt or desks. Be creative. Be flawed. Be chopped. Think outside the box. Any box.

   
   
7. Decide on the marketing plan for your system. You think maybe that creating some brilliant new school of thought is enough? HAH! Everybody has a system; if you want the world to pay any note to yours, you'll have to SELL it. Hire some competent marketing and public-relations expertise. Get a campaign rolling. Have yourself inserted into news, entertainment, other media. Get guest-shots on major broadcast shows. Do book-tours, seminars, mall-openings, poetry slams, WHATEVER IT TAKES.

Follow these seven easy steps, and in no time at all you'll gain all the public acclaim you ever wanted, invited to schmooze with Oprah, Bill Gates, the Chief of Naval Operations, the Dalai Lama, Brittney — you name it, it'll be yours. So get out there, start thinking, and set the world on fire. Well, not literally, unless that's part of your system. Whatever. Anyway, for more information, see the links provided above, as well as THUS: The LOGICAL PROOF Game, and the ParaLogic stuff just below here. Yeah, that's right, scroll down, there it is, Einstein. Good luck.

ParaLogic: The JAIN DOCTRINE of MAYBE, Extended

The ancient Jain philosophy includes Syadvada or Anekantvada, the "Doctrine of Maybe" or "Sevenfold Paralogic", holding that since reality is constantly-changing and partly-obscured, anything we say about reality may be true in some sense, false in some sense, and unknowable in some sense. That is, instead of being TRUE or FALSE, all statements evaluate to some form of

maybe (TRUE and/or FALSE and/or UNKNOWABLE)

1. MAYBE TRUE
2. MAYBE FALSE
3. MAYBE UNKNOWABLE
4. MAYBE TRUE AND FALSE
5. MAYBE TRUE AND UNKNOWABLE
6. MAYBE FALSE AND UNKNOWABLE
7. MAYBE TRUE AND FALSE AND UNKNOWABLE

I have extended this paralogic by adding two more terms: TRIVIAL and IRRELEVANT. For instance, the statement '2=2' is probably true, but it's trivial. And any statement about an entity or process that can have no possible effect upon you may be true, but it's probably irrelevant to your existence.

maybe (TRUE and/or FALSE and/or UNKNOWABLE and/or TRIVIAL and/or IRRELEVANT)

This paralogic, containing five terms, thus has thirtyone (2^5-1) possible states, a vast refinement over the binary TRUE/FALSE dichotomy or even the Jain sevenfold paralogic. (But I won't bother to list the expansion here. YOU can work it out, eh?) Other paralogics may add even more terms for even greater precision in evaluating statements — but I'm not sure that such further extension serves any purpose beyond cerebral masturbation. Yow.

On Being DIFFERENTLY LOGICAL

Perhaps you think differently. Perhaps you are DIFFERENTLY LOGICAL. What is this? What does it mean? THE OFFICIAL POLITICALLY CORRECT DICTIONARY AND HANDBOOK (H.Beard & C.Cerf, 1992) includes this definition:

differently logical. Those whose reasoning powers are deemed inferior, and whose conclusions are therefore dismissed as "wrong," by the dominant logocentric majority.

But postmodernist philosophy, deconstructionism (see below), and other cogent analyses show positively that there is no 'right' or 'wrong', no 'better' or 'worse' when it comes to thought. All statements and thoughts and arguments are just interpretations of texts and subtexts, based on the spirit of the interpreter, with no objective validity or lack thereof to hinder the interpretation.

So, THINK WHAT YOU WILL! Feel free to follow any logics, any mental paths, any chains of thought and reasoning and fantasy. They are all equivalent.

You are a free spirit, a free thinker, untrammeled by the bounds and restrictions of ordinary thought. You look at the world in new and different ways. Don't just think of yourself as cerebrally challenged. You are VALID. And I have a nice bridge to sell you. Contact me right away.

The DECONSTRUCTIONISM GAME is now here.