2016 gruodžio 15 d., 15:08 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 3-16 eilutės iš
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. I further take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six equivalences which yield six qualities of signs. Our minds leverage the tensions in these equivalences to shift our attention from what we know to what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.

In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how
we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs:
* Evolution: A hierarchy (of variations
) is organized with a sequence (of times).
* Atlas: A network (of adjacency relations) is organized with a hierarchy (of global and local views
).
* Handbook: A sequence (of instructions) is organized with a network (of loops and branchings
).
* Chronicle: A sequence (of events in
time) is organized with a hierarchy (of time periods).
* Catalog: A hierarchy (of concepts) is organized with a
* Odyssey: A network (of states) is organized with
a sequence (of steps).
In general
, a first, large, unified, comprehensive structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure of multiple vantage points.

In 2012, I analyzed and grouped all of the paradoxes listed in Wikipedia. This yielded the following six themes:
* Concepts may be
inexact. (The paradox of an evolution.) We can't specify exactly at what point in the womb a child becomes conscious, or at what point in evolution two species diverge.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts. (The paradox of an atlas.) If we replace all of the parts of an automobile, and then build a copy with all of the old parts, which is the original?
į:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. It is the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six equivalences which yield six qualities of signs. Our minds leverage the tensions in these equivalences to shift our attention from what we know to what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.

In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly,
we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs:
* Evolution: A hierarchy (of variations) is organized with a sequence (of times).
* Atlas: A network
(of adjacency relations) is organized with a hierarchy (of global and local views).
* Handbook: A sequence (of instructions
) is organized with a network (of loops and branchings).
* Chronicle: A sequence (of events in time
) is organized with a hierarchy (of time periods).
* Catalog: A
hierarchy (of concepts) is organized with a network (of cross-links).
* Odyssey: A
network (of states) is organized with a sequence (of steps).
In general,
a first, large, unified, comprehensive structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure of multiple vantage points.

In 2012, I analyzed and grouped all of the paradoxes listed in Wikipedia. This yielded the following six themes:
* Concepts may be
inexact. (The paradox of an evolution.) We can't specify exactly at what point in the womb a child becomes conscious, or at what point in evolution two species diverge.
*
The whole is not the sum of the parts. (The paradox of an atlas.) If we replace all of the parts of an automobile, and then build a copy with all of the old parts, which is the original?
Pakeistos 18-30 eilutės iš
* There may be a limited contradiction. (The paradox of a chronicle.) How can we reliably learn from one who has ever made a mistake?
* We cannot make explicit all relevant assumptions. (The paradox of a catalog.) 10+4 may equal 2 if we happen to be thinking about a clock.
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of an odyssey.) "I am lying when I say 'I am lying.'"
Each type of paradox brings to light the essential gap between the (seemingly infinite) primary comprehensive structure and the (manifestly finite) secondary structure which organizes our vantage points. Our mind visualizes a qualitative but illusory relationship between the primary and secondary structures. Upon closer inspection it becomes apparent that there is no definitive way to match up the two structures.

However,
these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know. This may be considered as the gap between signified and signifier. Consider four levels of knowledge (whether, what, how, why) in terms of Peirce's types of signs (the thing itself, icon, index, symbol). Then pairs of these four levels yield six qualities of signs. A sign can be:
* Malleable: Equivalent icons refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an evolution.)
* Modifiable: Equivalent indices refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an atlas.)
* Mobile: Equivalent indices refer to the same icon. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a handbook.)
* Memorable: The same symbol refers to equivalent indices. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a chronicle.)
* Meaningful: The same symbol refers to equivalent icons. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a catalog.)
* Motivated: The same symbol refers to equivalent things. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an odyssey.)
į:
* There may be a limited contradiction. (The paradox of a chronicle.) How can we reliably learn from one who has ever made a mistake?
*
We cannot make explicit all relevant assumptions. (The paradox of a catalog.) 10+4 may equal 2 if we happen to be thinking about a clock.
*
We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of an odyssey.) "I am lying when I say 'I am lying.'"

Each
type of paradox brings to light the essential gap between the (seemingly infinite) primary comprehensive structure and the (manifestly finite) secondary structure which organizes our vantage points. Our mind visualizes a qualitative but illusory relationship between the primary and secondary structures. Upon closer inspection it becomes apparent that there is no definitive way to match up the two structures.

However,
these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know. This may be considered as the gap between signified and signifier. Consider four levels of knowledge (whether, what, how, why) in terms of Peirce's types of signs (the thing itself, icon, index, symbol). Then pairs of these four levels yield six qualities of signs. A sign can be:
*
Malleable: Equivalent icons refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an evolution.)
*
Modifiable: Equivalent indices refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an atlas.)
*
Mobile: Equivalent indices refer to the same icon. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a handbook.)
*
Memorable: The same symbol refers to equivalent indices. (Equivalency defined by paradox of a chronicle.)
*
Meaningful: The same symbol refers to equivalent icons. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a catalog.)
*
Motivated: The same symbol refers to equivalent things. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an odyssey.)

Paradoxes thus heighten and reveal six ways that our minds foster our mental freedom, ever shifting from the structures we know to that gap which models what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:51 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom but also circumscribe it by revealing six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage. These tensions let our minds shift from what we know to what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
į:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. I further take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six equivalences which yield six qualities of signs. Our minds leverage the tensions in these equivalences to shift our attention from what we know to what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:39 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom but also circumscribe it by specifying six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage as tensions to focus upon what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
į:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom but also circumscribe it by revealing six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage. These tensions let our minds shift from what we know to what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:36 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 15-16 eilutės iš
* Concepts may be inexact. (The paradox in evolution.) We can't specify exactly at what point in the womb a child becomes conscious, or at what point in evolution two species diverge.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts. (The paradox in an atlas.) If we replace all of the parts of an automobile, and then build a copy with all of the old parts, which is the original?
į:
* Concepts may be inexact. (The paradox of an evolution.) We can't specify exactly at what point in the womb a child becomes conscious, or at what point in evolution two species diverge.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts. (The paradox of an atlas.) If we replace all of the parts of an automobile, and then build a copy with all of the old parts, which is the original?
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:35 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 24-29 eilutės iš
* Malleable:
* Modifiable:
* Mobile:
* Memorable:
* Meaningful:
* Motivated
:
į:
* Malleable: Equivalent icons refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an evolution.)
* Modifiable
: Equivalent indices refer to the same thing. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an atlas.)
* Mobile: Equivalent indices refer to the same icon. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a handbook.)
* Memorable: The same symbol refers to equivalent indices. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a chronicle.)
* Meaningful: The same symbol refers to equivalent icons. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of a catalog.)
* Motivated: The same symbol refers to equivalent things. (Equivalency defined by the paradox of an odyssey.)
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:28 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom by specifying six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage in focusing upon what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
į:
I identify six themes among paradoxes with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom but also circumscribe it by specifying six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage as tensions to focus upon what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 14:20 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously infer what we don't know.
į:
Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. We may take this to be the gap between signifier and signified, as characterized by six qualities of signs. Paradoxes make evident our mental freedom by specifying six equivalences which our minds regularly leverage in focusing upon what we don't know. We thus variously clarify what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 12:20 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 23 eilutė iš:
However, these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know. Consider four levels of knowledge (whether, what, how, why) in terms of Peirce's types of signs (the thing itself, icon, index, symbol). Then pairs of these four levels yield six qualities of signs. A sign can be:
į:
However, these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know. This may be considered as the gap between signified and signifier. Consider four levels of knowledge (whether, what, how, why) in terms of Peirce's types of signs (the thing itself, icon, index, symbol). Then pairs of these four levels yield six qualities of signs. A sign can be:
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 10:51 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 23-24 eilutės iš
However, these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know.
į:
However, these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know. Consider four levels of knowledge (whether, what, how, why) in terms of Peirce's types of signs (the thing itself, icon, index, symbol). Then pairs of these four levels yield six qualities of signs. A sign can be:
* Malleable:
* Modifiable:
* Mobile:
* Memorable:
* Meaningful:
* Motivated:
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 10:19 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 22-23 eilutės:

However, these six mental illusions do allow our minds to make tangible that gap, which is to say, that which we do not know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 10:17 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 20-22 eilutės iš
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say 'I am lying.'"

I relate these themes
to how we organize thoughts in terms of sequences, hierarchies and networks.
į:
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of an odyssey.) "I am lying when I say 'I am lying.'"
Each type of paradox brings to light the essential gap between the (seemingly infinite) primary comprehensive structure and the (manifestly finite) secondary structure which organizes our vantage points. Our mind visualizes a qualitative but illusory relationship between the primary and secondary structures. Upon closer inspection it becomes apparent that there is no definitive way to match up the two structures.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 10:09 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 15 eilutė iš:
* Concepts may be inexact. (The paradox in evolution.)
į:
* Concepts may be inexact. (The paradox in evolution.) We can't specify exactly at what point in the womb a child becomes conscious, or at what point in evolution two species diverge.
Pakeista 19 eilutė iš:
* We cannot make explicit all relevant assumptions. (The paradox of a catalog.)
į:
* We cannot make explicit all relevant assumptions. (The paradox of a catalog.) 10+4 may equal 2 if we happen to be thinking about a clock.
Ištrintos 20-25 eilutės:

I relate these themes to how we organize thoughts in terms of sequences, hierarchies and networks.

Concepts may be inexact.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts.
*
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 10:00 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 3 eilutė iš:
Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously know what we don't know.
į:
Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously infer what we don't know.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:58 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 20 eilutė iš:
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say that sometimes I tell the truth."
į:
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say 'I am lying.'"
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:55 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 14 eilutė iš:
In of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia This yielded the following six themes:
į:
In 2012, I analyzed and grouped all of the paradoxes listed in Wikipedia. This yielded the following six themes:
Pakeista 18 eilutė iš:
* There may be a limited contradiction. (The paradox of a chronicle.) How can we possibly learn from one who has made a mistake?
į:
* There may be a limited contradiction. (The paradox of a chronicle.) How can we reliably learn from one who has ever made a mistake?
Pakeista 20 eilutė iš:
* We can change our minds, choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say that sometimes I tell the truth."
į:
* We can choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say that sometimes I tell the truth."
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:50 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 5 eilutė iš:
In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first, unified, comprehensive structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure of multiple vantage points, as follows:
į:
In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs:
Pakeistos 12-13 eilutės iš

My survey of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia
yielded the following six themes:
į:
In general, a first, large, unified, comprehensive structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure of multiple vantage points.

In of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia This
yielded the following six themes:
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:47 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Ištrintos 11-21 eilutės:

My survey of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia yielded the following six themes:
* Knowing What We Don't Know: A Taxonomy of Paradox

Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously know what we don't know.

In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure. I observed the following restructurings:
* Evolution
* Atlas
* Handbook
*
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:39 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 5-9 eilutės iš
In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure. I observed the following restructurings:
* Evolution
* Atlas
* Handbook
*
į:
In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first, unified, comprehensive structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure of multiple vantage points, as follows:
* Evolution: A hierarchy (of variations) is organized with a sequence (of times).
* Atlas: A network (of adjacency relations) is organized with a hierarchy (of global and local views).
* Handbook: A sequence (of instructions) is organized with a network (of loops and branchings).
* Chronicle: A sequence (of events in time) is organized with a hierarchy (of time periods).
* Catalog: A hierarchy (of concepts) is organized with a network (of cross-links).
* Odyssey: A network (of states) is organized with a sequence (of steps).
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 09:27 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeista 1 eilutė iš:
Knowing What We Don't Know: A Taxonomy of Paradox
į:
[+Inferring What We Don't Know: A Taxonomy of Paradox+]
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 01:14 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pakeistos 12-15 eilutės iš
* Concepts may be inexact.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts.
*
į:
* Knowing What We Don't Know: A Taxonomy of Paradox

Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously know what we don't know.

In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure. I observed the following restructurings:
* Evolution
* Atlas
* Handbook
*

My survey of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia yielded the following six themes:
* Concepts may be inexact. (The paradox in evolution.)
* The whole is not the sum of the parts. (The paradox in an atlas.) If we replace all of the parts of an automobile, and then build a copy with all of the old parts, which is the original?
* Our attention affects what we observe. (The paradox of a handbook.) Achilles can never catch a tortoise if we keep measuring the distance between them.
* There may be a limited contradiction. (The paradox of a chronicle.) How can we possibly learn from one who has made a mistake?
* We cannot make explicit all relevant assumptions. (The paradox of a catalog.)
* We can change our minds, choose differently in the same circumstances. (The paradox of odyssey.) "I am lying when I say that sometimes I tell the truth."

I relate these themes to how we organize thoughts in terms of sequences, hierarchies and networks.

Concepts may be inexact.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts.
2016 gruodžio 15 d., 01:03 atliko AndriusKulikauskas -
Pridėtos 1-17 eilutės:
Knowing What We Don't Know: A Taxonomy of Paradox

Six themes among paradoxes may be identified with six different ways that we reorganize thoughts. Paradox is inherent in the gap that arises when we reorganize our thoughts. Six qualities of signs and six types of equivalences can be described accordingly in terms of that gap. Paradoxes make evident six kinds of mental inadequacy which our minds regularly leverage in focusing on what we don't know. We thus variously know what we don't know.

In 1998, I was intrigued by educator Kestas Augutis's vision that every high school student write three books (a chronicle, a thesaurus, and an encyclopedia) so as to master three kinds of thinking (sequential, hierarchical, and network). I thus collected dozens of examples of how we organize our thoughts. Surprisingly, we never use sequences, hierarchies or networks in isolation. Instead, we use them in pairs. A first structure grows so robust that we restructure it with a second, smaller, different structure. I observed the following restructurings:
* Evolution
* Atlas
* Handbook
*

My survey of paradoxes listed in Wikipedia yielded the following six themes:
* Concepts may be inexact.
* The whole is not the sum of the parts.
*

I relate these themes to how we organize thoughts in terms of sequences, hierarchies and networks.

Naujausi pakeitimai

Klausimai #FFFFC0

Teiginiai #FFFFFF

Kitų mintys #EFCFE1

Dievas man #FFECC0

Iš ankščiau #CCFFCC

Mieli skaitytojai, visa mano kūryba ir kartu visi šie puslapiai yra visuomenės turtas, kuriuo visi kviečiami laisvai naudotis, dalintis, visaip perkurti. - Andrius

 Puslapis paskutinį kartą pakeistas 2016 gruodžio 15 d., 15:08