New Philosophy System: Effectuationism

Forum: Effectuationism Philosophy System, etc.

Introduction Effectuationism is a new, very original, democracy, diversity and nature friendly system of concepts informed by premise(s). Effectuationism expresses that concepts comprising a system are 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, so: 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. (note: some readers seem to have a problem in recognising that this paragraph and the next are my definition of "categoricalism"), 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 concepts such as 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: []

*

April 2012, Regarding effect(s), through interaction of the academics in philosophy and (emerging) Effectuationism: There were one hundred and one factors at play. A few of my opinions: Initially I did not know virtually anything about the academics but went along to a Joint Session basically to check the rigour of my course of development against theirs – covering a long-shot that I might be surprised. After a near lifetime of investigation, apart from looking after my bread and butter, when I made the attendees aware, in effect, of the Bronze Age nature of their concepts, simply by presenting them with my developing concepts and, a couple years later, my concepts’ further development into the new system “Effectuationism”, they, it appears to me, were not up to the requirements of spine, grace, professional integrity and love of wisdom to openly comment on it. They commented on it in my presence without saying what they were talking about. I would not entertain this discourtesy. Interaction and right of reply were precluded - grouping rudeness, barbarism and denial of the specialist launch platform to the new system: sore losers. When the system first emerged at the end of 1995, I consciously considered whether to wait until the Session in July '96 and simply show up with it as a dramatic contrast to the floundering of ‘the intellectual cream of society’ in a Bronze Age hole and not even aware of it, and surprise and embarrass them, or instead forward my work in Jan. ‘96, that they could give a more considered response, showing themselves to be honourable and lovers of wisdom. I chose the latter, which I regarded as the better standards. In the event, I was surprised - by the scholars of Ethics. Perhaps developments were also partly due to (possible mis-understandings in) my interactions with an Irish attendee. Other Irish (attendees) came across my work, but, too, were not up to it – perhaps in character for members of a profession that has given the world Bronze Age informed concepts for thousands of years. Also, as above, I had been attending Joint Sessions for a couple of years before my concepts came together as a system, so I was still predominantly engaged by the factors to its emergence - analysing (my) nature and the rigour of possible emergences- -crystallisations. Even for some years after, I was very focused on further checking the rigour of Effectuationism and had not become fluent in dealing with academics blissfully unaware of the non applicability of the their concepts and the importance of conceptualising the system in its own right.. They, their egos threatened, cliqued and encountered it with their Bronze Age “minds”, becoming mongrelised expressions of it. Of course some, perhaps many, being honourable and lovers of wisdom, did not readily opt for such underground grouping. However they did not prevail. As already stated, there were about one hundred other factors featured. PK (ISBN 10: 0-9532009-9-X) ISBN: 978-0-9532009-9-3

*  

Eff. Forum

Web Tech. Translate with BabelFish Philosophy and Physics Links * pkinane@iol.ie

Copyright ©  Effectuationism (Sept. 2009) All rights reserved, by Peter Kinane ISSN: 978-0-9532009-9-3   Or, to order through post: E-mail pkinane@iol.ie for address. Price, including postage: €10.00. If buying through post, please enclose secured remittance with order.

*