intellectual themes               back to index.


There has been a long tradition of logic. It has been so convoluted, and
often futile, that it is time to have a better way of measuring progress.

This new technique is almost as simple as adopting formal categories.

Instead of adopting a 'guise' such as metaphysics (including modal
realism), or devolving on some paradox or trick of logistics, logical
exceptionism sees the quantification of qualities as the key to
understanding the inner workings of reasoning.

This is no mere epiphenomenon, instead it is a real science, the science
of making not always the most brilliant deduction, but instead, the most
appropriate and best.

This is possible by appreciating the objective categories which underly
logical relationships.

There is a policy of 'going long', and then making the best of it.

It requires skill, and it requires an understanding of absurdities.

However, if in the end someone fails to describe what can work, it is still
possible to choose a different context, or in other words, to be a

Although as a rule many things can be quantified to absurd lengths, the
exceptionist seeks to reduce quantification by grasping the objective
quantities of properties which qualify a given thing.

What is less important than connecting any given problem to the
objective picture of all puzzles is the kind of indecision that delays real
decisions about the nature of properties.

Here is one major example of demonstrating exceptionism:

The Rhino and Caffeine.

Rhino represents 'thing'
Caffeine represents a 'modifier'.

Permuting the two elements results in a description of all types of things
which have been modified.

My assessement of this is the following four categories:

 1. 'Doing the Rhino' (Rhino & Rhino)
 2. 'Rhino caffeine' (Rhino & Caffeine)
 3. Caffeinated Caffeine (Caffeine & Caffeine), and
 4. Caffeinated Rhino (Caffeine & Rhino)

What is especially useful is the implicit symbolism to all types of such
relationships, showing that, at least at this level, exceptions are reducible
to type-categories.

Perhaps it is surprising that two properties would have only four
permutations, but it is worth noting that the importance of those
categories as represented by their generality is in no way restricted by
the limitation of the set. Indeed, the set contributes to significance when
the variety is distributed evenly without unnecessary risk.