The Mystical A Priori

(∀x)[(Dx ⊃ Vx) ⊃ Tx] ^[1]

"All valid deductive inferences are tautologies."

”Where science attacks, phenomenology brings forth; where science uses a hammer, phenomenology incorporates a lens”--The Art of Phenomenology and its Implications for the Study of Religion, James Mark Shields ©1994,revised 2008 ).

The phenomenological Eidetic reduction strips away all the accidental characteristics of human beings to reveal the essential characteristic of human existence ("existential's" of Dasein) as “being-there” and “being-in-the-world.” This is not psychology, but an eidetic analysis of the internal logical structure of Dasein. A Dasein analytic utilized in the critique of culture reverses the direct of the reduction to describe the relative categories of culture, and then these accidental characteristics begin to reappear.

Small changes in interpretation, or analytical distinctions, have large consequences on the out come of analysis. First, we saw how new definitions distinguished Schein, meaning, “semblence,” and “Erscheinung” (Sign). The same redefinition is made now with “epoche.”

Husserl‘s “epoche” now means something like “conversion,” or the “overturning of the soul, ” the poet Leonard Cohen speaks about. The theological phenomenologist are not cheating, rather adjusting her tools for describing the subject. This is a far cry from Husserl’s original pan-mathematical-logico-formalism that characterized his “epoche.”

The mathematician, Edmund Husserl, would always write a paper on phenomenology after he had written a paper on mathematics, and alternate between the two areas of philosophy.​

Is it all True? All this is poetically beautiful, but is it True!?

We should be able to figure that out. There are only two kinds of propositions: synthetic and analytic propositions.

A synthetic proposition can either be true, or false like, “The circle is blue.” Synthetic propositions are statements of “fact.”

On the other hand, analytic propositions are true by definition such as “circles are round.” If we try to deny a tautology, it then becomes false by definition, “circles are not round” which is a contradiction and is now necessarily false.

Of course it’s all true!—they are tautologies! And the truth of tautologies is derived from its own circular internal logical necessity.

You may be surprised that the rule of non-contradiction “A is not non-A” is just a language convention and a principle of organization.

I wonder what Theologian Paul Tillich will have to say about this? 

“The theological concepts of both idealists and naturalist are rooted in a 'mystical a priori,' an awareness of something that transcends the cleavage between subject and object. And if in the course of a “scientific “ procedure this a priori is discovered, its discovery is possible only because it was present from the very beginning. This is the circle which no religious philosopher can escape. And it is by no means a vicious one. Every understanding of spiritual things is circular”(Tillich, Paul. Systematic Theology Vol. I. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press, 1951,1957& 1963.p.9).

I was a little let down also when I discovered Logic is itself based on this same logical necessity. I don’t know the answer except “...If all the angels in heaven were to put their heads together, they could still bring to pass only an approximation....” Kierkegaard once said of theology.

All valid deductive arguments are tautologies:

1.) If A, then B
2.) A
---------------------
Therefore: B (Modus Ponens, 1,2.).

Simply add together premises 1, and 2, to form a conjunction.

Make the conjunction the antecedent to a conditional proposition, and then we have a tautology:

{[(A>B)*(A)] ⊃ B} is a tautology.

* = and, (conjunction)
⊃= If, then, (conditional)

This works the same with all valid deductive arguments.

I was a little disappointed that logical necessity is just a language convention. I set aside this problem in theology also because, “...If all the angels in heaven could put there heads together...” Well, you know.

Tautologies are true...but unfortunately, they are not always useful, or practical.

...on the other hand, technology is very useful, and practical...but its presuppositions are not true. (See, “The Illusion of Technique,” by Barrett, William, Anchor Books/Doubleday, 1979.).

Then if we are to believe in tautologies, are we then just solipsists?

...Solipsism, when it’s all worked out is the same as Realism.

“…only certain things exist, but that they exist is something that cannot be said. It can only be shown, and the solipsist’s mistake is to express it in a factual proposition…. [The Subject, or observer] is only a metaphysical subject, which is a kind of focal vanishing point behind the mirror and what the mirror reflects. So the only thing that he [Wittgenstein] can legitimately say is that what is reflected in the mirror is reflected in the mirror…but this is…only a tautology. It means only that whatever objects exist exist. So when solipsism is worked out, it becomes clear that there is no difference between it and realism”(Ludwig Wittgenstein by David Pears, Penguin,1970, pp.74-75.)

^[1] Universal affirmative categorical “A” type proposition with definitions:
"All valid deductive inferences are tautologies."

(∀x)= for every x

x = variable

⊃ = Conditional if,then proposition

D = Deductive inference

V = Valid, consistent

T = Tautology, true by definition

It Seemed a Better Way

by

Leonard Cohen

"It seemed the better way

When first I heard him speak

Now it's much too late

To turn the other cheek

Sounded like the truth

Seemed the better way

Sounded like the truth

But it's not the truth today..."