Nonlinear thinking: the missing link

The truth is always greater than us. Whether separately or united, we are parts of the truth. This means that none of us can wholly grasp the truth, but we can find ways that lead us toward it. One way I found has been in my consciousness since I was 22. I know this as nonlinear thinking, after being disenchanted with linear algebra and linear circuits at university. I thought back then that I needed to share this kind of thinking with the world. And I wanted to teach it, but I didn’t know how. Even with having 40 posts on this blog and 280 categorized individuals, I still don’t know how to explain this process of thinking, which is a crucial parameter in my methodology, as we’ve learned in reasoning about the Diagram, yet I want to try. I don’t guarantee that I would be able to explain it, but I will try. Maybe, with everything on my blog, this piece won’t clarify the whole, but maybe it would.

The ‘nonlinear’ journey’s expository setting of the stage

What is nonlinear thinking as I understand it? I started on this philosophical journey back in 2006, when I created my own ‘science’ called ultralogy and a logical schematic that helped me reason through it. I was developing a subjective proto-model, several iterations before the current Model. This first model was based on the triune logic pictured below.


Ultralogy, a triune logic

Everything, or something, can be pictured as an Extreme with its own Opposite to balance it and a Critical point through which both are overcome. You can think in a particular way. Take the characteristic of smart people. You’ll soon find that not all of smart people are absolutely smart. Each has an element of stupidity in him or her. And the same can be said about stupid people: not all stupid people, not any, really, are absolutely stupid, in the strict sense of the word. You find it doesn’t matter what you start with because there will always be an opposite and neither will be absolute but, instead, both will be intermixed. This is a precursor to the dialectical continuum I later developed for the Model.

With all the changes in the model, the critical point hasn’t really changed in my thinking. The critical point is still critical. So what is it? It’s something that goes beyond even the continua of the opposites. When the concept of Extreme helps you frame everything as an absolute (as is generally framed in our language), Opposite helps us to think more fluidly and dialectically, whereas Critical point becomes the last stage of this process, when even duality disappears in a state where nothing can be clearly discerned. Critical point, a concept taken from chemistry of gases, in my philosophy serves as a metaphysical anchor for every single dialectical thought. It is a point, which appears after understanding that ever the concentrations of Extreme and Opposite don’t really matter because in the critical points they are always perfectly balanced.

The following stage with climax

Later, I realized that critical points are too important to be applied to every single thought. Instead, I found Extreme and Opposite to be accurate but not specific enough. A more objective way of analyzing our thoughts would relate to reality. My discovering Dr. Michael Kosok’s philosophy helped me in ascertaining this. So I started thinking in terms of Objects and Contexts, which are similar to Extremes and Opposites only in a kind of maximized dialectical way of reasoning. Earlier, you thought in terms of particles and antiparticles, males and females, etc., and now you think in terms of particles, people, etc., and their environments. While the logical structure of the earlier type of thinking was naively subjective, the thinking now is more complex. It not only involves some internal analysis but also an establishment of a connection with a known external reality. Critical points, after all, cannot be specified with a word but at least they can help in viewing reality more formally.

An important distinction of Object and Context is also reflected in the understanding of critical points. A context cannot be reduced to its part(s), while an object (or objects) is not enough to advance to another level of ‘synthesis.’ A critical point, in most cases unspecified, is probably closer in approximation to a context because of nonlinearity. Objects can be linearly counted, and contexts are harder to count linearly. For example, there are about 7 billion human bodies, but the number of rooms, forests, jungles, and other environments inhabited by people, although limited, are complicated to count because their boundaries sometimes are not very clear[1]. So a critical point involves something that is impossible to count in respect to physical objects and contexts. One can only count critical points in the metaphysical realm, but it is best not to specify anything about them because any specification can be reduced to a subjective interpretation and would not be scientific.

The resolution

Nonlinear thinking is a kind of thinking that involves analyzing contexts without reducing everything to a context. Nonlinear movement in thought starts from complexity and ends in simplexity, a concreteness that’s without loss of original contextual complexity. This process, being also physical, when applied to thinking, results in an intuitive grasp of the most far-reaching truths. This process is the basis of everything explained or described on this blog. The categorical apparatus of the Diagram cannot be used without this process of thought.

One has to, in order to understand my judgments, be able to connect any facts to contexts in the Model. One needs to be able to think through a smooth, ‘vertical’ movement from one context to another, regardless of their sizes. And one should be able to find a way to see how individuals, within their philosophical categories, interact with each other in your mind, reflecting the way they would have interacted in reality. Your mind, thus, becomes a stage, on which individuals from any period of time and any background can meet, argue, and mingle, as if they were actual people, rather than mere representations, all living at the same time in your head.

The beauty of all this is that, with the help of our minds, we can bridge the internal-to-external divide and we can pass it whenever and to wherever we wish to go. A universe of unlimited possibilities opens to us, if only we can learn to differentiate the internal from the external worlds in order to transcend them altogether at the end.

[1] There are additional two factors that complicate the body-environment relationship. The first factor is that people and environments are connected through a field of perceptual awareness, so the environment’s boundary is the farthest one can perceive where one can exist in the immediate moment. The second factor is that besides people there are other bodies, such as animals, insects, worms, and even trees and works of art.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s