[MD] I Am a Strange Loop

[Kevin Perez]

Hello Arlo,
 
In a response to Ham you wrote,
 
> I think the point here (getting back to strange loops) is that no symbol system
> is capable of self-reference without falling victim to paradox, recursion and
> (what Hofstadter calls) "strange loops". The nature of the beast (metaphor
> intended) is that the core of our knowledge, being self-referential, is always
> incomplete. And there is no way to overcome that. Building "better and better"
> symbolic systems is not an escape, for once any system becomes sufficiently
> complex to attempt to contain itself, we end up looking at Magritte's "The
> False Mirror" and saying "Mu". Whether its Pirsig saying "all this is an
> analogy" or Hofstadter's TNT, the endgame is always the same. Epimenides
> paradox can't be avoided.
 
And in a response to Platt you wrote,
 
> I'm not sure the MOQ "overcomes" paradox and loops, and neither does Hofstadter.
> My take is in their acceptance of this as an unavoidable core to any
> intellection. My take on koans, for example, is that they point TO this paradox
> as a way of moving the individual into acceptance of this rather than a
> delusion that it can be overcome.
 
Thank you.  This is good stuff.
 
I would add that the pointing to and acceptance of paradox and mystery is one of the
aims of religion, at least those religious traditions that incorporate ritual.  The purpose
of ritual is often mistaken to be the demonstration of something objective; objective
truth.  I don't believe this is the case.  Ritual, when its affective, which is its only
purpose, imo, is transformative.  Engaging ritualistically with paradox and cosmic
mystery (e.g., life, death, goodness, oneness, compassion, forgiveness, love, etc.)
transforms a sterile concept into something real.
 

Kevin

 	 
---------------------------------
Looking for earth-friendly autos? 
 Browse Top Cars by "Green Rating" at Yahoo! Autos' Green Center.