Effectuationism Philosophy System - Introduction

©

New Philosophy System: Effectuationism

Effectuationism - Philosophy System Introduction Effectuationism is a new, very original, democracy, diversity and nature friendly system of concepts informed by premise(s). Effectuationism expresses concepts comprising a system as self-reinforcing, or mutually complimentary, though not necessarily coherent, by higher faculty standards, which faculties would see a system as a system and would want to test it against any other systems for rigour of value – coherence, coherence, coherence. The coherence or rigour of value of such a system of concepts is determined through its being brought into tension of relationship with any other philosophy systems. This would contrast with the more categoricalist, classical philosophy system(s), which feature concepts such as space and time, observer and object, truth, fact, reality, etc., which concepts do not imply a system; do not imply that they are premise dependent, supportive or indeed expressive of each other or comprise a circular system- -model. They do not imply that other systems may be possible, and the importance of systems being brought into tension with any other systems. Categoricalist concepts are grounded in the evolutionary stage when primal senses emerged to perceive distinctions of form, and thereby inform the organism about its environment. This led to concepts of “this”, “that” and “the other”, all rather discrete, of definite boundaries and unchanging essence, much as Plotinus premises. Note that from such categoricalist premises, Plotinus- -Plato (necessarily) developed a categoricalist system; a system of categorical concepts- -values. It seems to me, philosophy was trapped - though probably not conscious of the trap - through featuring such premises, until Effectuationism emerged. So, any concept featuring in a system expresses the informing premise and connotes the entire system, and would not translate or transfer across systems. It would transform, or perhaps even not arise. For example, the flat earth system- -model features the concepts “going over the edge of the world” and “the Sun moves across the sky and returns in a sun boat to the place from whence it riseth”. These do not feature in the heliocentric system. My system does not feature the primal premises and incoherent concepts of categoricalist systems. The Eff. Nav. System is a quite different navigation model to the Guidance Positioning System and does not feature Special Relativity type concepts. Likewise, with models of receiving gifts at Christmas, the child’s model includes, for example, the concept of Rudolf getting around to every house in one night. This does not arise in adult models. Somewhat consequent to such categoricalist modelling is the notion of The Scientific Method as a reliable measure of making good sense. The (un)reliability and (lack of) rigour of this notion is apparent in the following: Theory: Be good and go to bed early and Santy will come. Experiment: I was good and went to bed early and Santy came. Essentially, through ‘The Scientific Method’, concepts are being tuned or reworked within a circular system. Apparently more than children fail to see the circularity. Eventually, someone may come along who so inter-relates and restructures them that effectively the circle is broken; a new premise, new concepts and a new circle or system emerges. Note: Having conceptualised my system, the reader would then have the option to relate it to their favourite (and other systems) to see how it fares as a formidably comprehensive and coherent formulation of the nature of ‘Nature’, or as whatever they fancy.       First principle: []