Nothing to say

I figure the more noise I make on this site, the more rubbish gets on it. The more rubbish that gets on it, the heavier it becomes in my mind. And the more I have to worry about what I've said, and whether I still believe it. The rubbish I talk of, the clutter, comes from setting down these very words. Or rather, the problem comes from how I handle it.

The problem is attachment.

It is the attachment to ideas, and the associated sense of accountability that admits the burden.

Opinions are dangerous to hold. Opinions can cause a lot of trouble.

But the most lamentable property of opinion to me, are their resistence to analysis.

Constructing an argument to show something is like trying to construct something out of wind.

There is nothing really tangible to work with in the first place, so nothing really tangible comes out.

At this point, I am expected to make the mistake of trying to claim that mathematical argument is somehow different. But this would be obviously contradictory to my above claim, that arguments are essentially vaporous.

However, I simply cannot admit to irrefutability.

All I can say is that mathematical argument, for me, (sometimes) obtains a greater sense of clarity, a feeling of completeness, and a feeling of consistency, of euphoria, and beauty than other kinds of argument. I see a pleasure in the complete and the absolutely describable.

But even maths can so easily fall apart and become a nightmare when the nihlist inside me gets agitated. What seem like concrete concepts suddenly vanish, doors open and paths appear, details previously considered irrelevant to the argument become so, like a word repeated too often and deliberately eventually losing all meaning. The complexity multiplies, the clutter increases, and the beauty ceases.

Despite this possibility, I feel that maths is ever so less succeptible to the problems of general argument, albeit it more fragile. Mathematical concepts, despite their abstractness, seem ever so more grounded, ever so more concrete and tangible in comparison to those which reside in the land of general ideas. Consider the question "What is truth?" compared to the statement and question "x^2 = 1, what is x?"

I like mathematics because it is the opposite of a mess, to me it is the opposite of confusion.

And mathematics usually has some kind of closure, punctuated for example by QED, unlike general argument.

Mathematics and beauty, with respect to the brain's perception of them, seem to me intricately related.

So I prefer mathematical argument to informal argument, but ultimately, I think I prefer neither.

I think that ultimately, that perhaps the absence of argument, harbors a beauty, a sense of peace, and a sense of clarity, that mathematics and other argument can never by there very nature being agitating pursuits.


Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.
  • Allowed HTML tags: <a> <em> <strong> <cite> <code> <ul> <ol> <li> <dl> <dt> <dd>
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.

More information about formatting options

This question is for testing whether you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Fill in the blank