|
In sub-atomic nature, the equivalence of
energy and mass implies exactly this, that energy is quite literally the same as
mass, and vice versa. Energy and mass are equivalent and by any theory of
meaning whatever, in Einstein’s famous equation, they are actually identical,
and this undercuts one of the foundational requirements of Western philosophy.
The latter requirement is a restrictive consideration of traditional logic
attributed to Aristotle, and recognised as the three laws of thought so-called.
Whatever reasons might have been at play in justifying the insertion of
Aristotle’s three laws of thought into European scholarship, they represent the
most refined defense available, both of the myth of Divine Creation, and of the
philosophical mechanisms underlying its assembly. The first of these, the law of identity as A=A is something of a
misnomer.
The first law of thought so-called asserts
that a thing is never anything other
than equal to, or equivalent, to itself. According to Aristotle’s law of identity
therefore, the identity of a thing relies on nothing outside of itself, which is
to say that its relatedness with other things has no influence or impact upon
its identity. A=A underpins the isolated, particularity of all things as per The
Book of Genesis, and as per the isolated, ideal particulars that populate
Plato’s realm of ideal forms. This first law of thought is supplemented by the
second law so-called.
The second law of thought, the law of contradiction asserts that a thing cannot simultaneously be both
itself and not itself. It too is
something of a misnomer – it is actually the law of non-contradiction! The
second law therefore merely states the underlying idea of the first law ‘in other words’ which means precisely that energy can
only ever be energy as in A=A; energy cannot therefore be mass! This exactly is
the point at which the ancient and the modern come into direct conflict. Newton is favoured implicitly in this restrictive
law of thought while, to remain true to non-identity theory, Einstein and
20thcentury science must be rejected. Identity-theory alone, which is
to say dialectic, the genius of our species could overcome this impasse that is
at the heart of our historically evolving, Judaeo Christian process. But the
third law of thought presents a stubborn resistance.
The third law of thought so-called
is the law of the excluded
middle – if a proposition is true its obverse must
be false. There is no middle-ground
between truth and falsity, which is to say that the possibility of a middle
ground between truth and falsity is excluded from consideration. There may well be
examples where the law of the excluded middle might seem perfectly sensible, but
try this: Energy can only ever be identical to energy! If this is true, its
obverse, energy is identical to
mass, must be false. The principle of equivalence contradicts all three laws
of thought!
The first law of thought as A=A
pontificates a restrictive theory of the identity of isolated particulars, while
the second law underpins the first law by excluding outside influences, and both
cases refer to a purely objective fact so-called, of material reality. Material
reality is made up of wholly isolated particulars as in Genesis! Give each of
these isolated particulars a name and you have nominalism! The universe is populated with
nameable, isolated particulars. Nominalism is the doctrine that there are no
universals or classes of things – there are only named particulars. The third
law is explicitly about thought itself. It anchors the first and second laws in
a restrictive proposal about the nature and mutually exclusive relationship of
truth and falsity. But all three laws have a dual character – each is an example
of theory isolated from its referent as required by empiricism (external
evaluation) correspondence theory, and non-identity theory, while each, by the
gift of a mystical metaphysic called the transcendental signifier (God) is
equally a privileged proposal about the nature of reality viewed from a
standpoint external to its referents; empiricism!
These three laws of thought so called were
assembled at a time when it had not been noticed or known that the form and
content of the universal subjectivity of nature and human being had been
hijacked by priests and philosophers, and projected onto an external God (or
Gods in the case of the Greeks). Instead therefore of universal subjectivity and
its objective counterparts being recognised as two sides of the same coin, and
in the special sense of dialectic, recognised as equivalent and identical one
within the other, these two essential components were dualised as independent
features and named accordingly as subjectivity and objectivity, and it made all
the difference. This mutually exclusive separation is taken for granted on the
authority of its Judaeo Christian credentials. Nothing else could justify
it!
Although it had been traditional to regard
each of these three laws of thought so-called both as a substantive
(ontological) truth and equally as independent (epistemological) mechanisms of
evaluation, in reality
they are each the subordinate feature of a compound, Judaeo Christian, cum
ancient Greek attitude – each is recognised as a feature in non-identity theory.
All together, they function as a defensive bastion in favour of the
philosophical underpinnings of Genesis, and against identity-theory. Each as
indicated, functions both as a mutual support for each other and for their
compound root, isolated particularity, the fundamental postulate of Judaeo
Christianity, of Western civilisation, of liberalism therefore, and therefore of
capitalism. Analysis or decomposition as deconstruction have led inexorably as
we have already confirmed, to the God-sent bounty for all dominant social forces
-- divide and rule! All
this is to say that if A can only ever be equal to A, the law of contradiction
is (both false as already indicated, and) pretty well superfluous as per the
second law. But equally, if as per the law of contradiction the proposition
that a thing cannot be both itself
and not itself, is true, then its
obverse as per the third law so-called, must be false. In this case energy can
only ever be equal and equivalent to energy as in A=A, in which case Einstein’s
famous equation e=mc2 must
be false, which, in light of the success of 20th century science cannot be
sustained!
What was regarded as true during most of
the modern period, has now become dubious to say the least, and at best,
deficient. It is as plain as plain needs be that Aristotle’s three laws of
thought were invoked quite specifically as a defense of Genesis and the Judaeo
Christian convention of non-equivalence it embodied as constitutional emphasis
for all Judaeo Christian time. It has already been confirmed that after Einstein
and 20th century science,
non-equivalence and non-identity theory can only retain its dependent
credibility as subordinate feature within the extra layer of understanding brought
forward by the primacy of equivalence, dialectic and identity theory. www.newtimepress.co.uk
|
