CIRCE Posted March 8, 2004 Report Share Posted March 8, 2004 Okay, guys; check this out: "A contradiction cannot exist. An atom is itself, and so is the universe; neither can contradict its own identity; nor can a part contradict the whole. No concept man forms is valid unless he integrates it without contradiction into the total sum of his knowledge. To arrive at a contradiction is to confess an error in one's thinking; to maintain a contradiction is to abdicate one's mind and to evict oneself from the realm of reality." (Atlas) Why this didn't bug me before is beyond me. Okay, so a contradiction can't exist. However, when it *does* exist, it means your thinking is screwed up. Now, fine--I get what she means--that the referents in reality don't contradict each other. Correspondingly, if our ideas contradict one another or reality they're wrong. However, the contradiction *can* exist within the realm of though--which of course is still part of the metaphysical universe ('cause there is nowhere else for it to exist). So this sure as hell looks bad from a semantic perspective, no? How *should* the sentence be constructed? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.