Back to "Uncompromising Positioning"

Back to H.F. Philosophy contents

1Scientistic discourse does not transcend unformalized vernacular discourse, because the latter is the only received vocabulary for the "ethics of inquiry and judgment"--and the latter is of overwhelming importance as the tacit presupposition of science. Positivism's patronization of natural language was a brutal dishonesty. [This is a perfect example of an explanation contending with the unworthy reader. Anyone who asks me to apologize for taking unformalized vernacular discourse as the target medium is not a suitable addressee.]

2This phrase is explained in "A Paraphrase of `Concept Art (1961)'" (October 1990).

3Among my published writings, "The Apprehension of Plurality" has this potential, but it is not in the uncompromised format. That is the whole point.

4"Assertion which conveys reality." Elsewhere I define truth as "awareness' registration of Being's self-exposure." These explications are too concessionary here.

5This requirement also appears in my rebuff of occultism. However, the rebuff of occultism does not belong here because the fault of my compromised presentations does not lie in occultism.

6In other words, the Freudian method of ascribing faults to people which they cannot themselves detect is ruled out. [I shouldn't have to instruct the reader that Freud's paranoid method is what is being ruled out. It's another concession.]

7Once an associate of mine showed Galileo's paradox (without identifying it as such) to an "educated layperson." The layperson said, "I'm not going to let you take my arithmetic away from me." Not knowing that the paradox is a seminal and defining result in the professional canon, the layperson shoved it away as evil--blaming my associate for one of the great discoveries of an earlier century. One never meets anybody who doesn't do this.

8Blueprint for a Higher Civilization. I cite the earliest published version of this study, which is rudimentary.

9Blueprint. The earliest published version of a study which I am now revisiting in "Regulating Inference from Authentically Descriptive Inconsistency."