intellectual themes               back to index.


Extending exceptions further encounters the problem of realizing the
reality of things. Surely realities are not themselves reducible merely to
type-categories. Yet that is not to say that type categories cannot
represent reality, to the extent that they have real properties.

This is the extent of the major argument against mathematics, namely,
that what is real must have real properties, and one may say something
like what is unknown cannot remain unexpressed.

With that said, mathematics is a kind of figurative segue into the realm of
the entic science, the realm of real symbols and real categories.

I will not say that an entity is never a symbol. Indeed, symbols provide a
basis for measuring the reality of categories.

It is important not to be caught up in the idea that symbols are letters of
the alphabet or numbers of the decimal system.

Such things as those are arbitrary (somewhat), and provide simplified
footholds on what promises to be a more ornate and hence exceptional

Because reality is exceptional, the science of exceptions (called
exceptionism) provides an excellent foothold upon reality.

The realization of an entity is in some sense the de-materialization of the
opposite category, and also an opposite transposition within all
contextualizations of the comparison.

Thus, the systemic context of opposites is fertile ground for the
realization of a manifold array of identical, perfectible entity categories.

The complexity of an archetype can then be compared to the qua
Boolean relationship between neutral and opposite categories.

For example, entities can be said to fall into the following categories,
according to exceptionism:

1. 4 categories: Universal (coherent, eclectic)
2. 2 categories: Neutral (logical, dynamic), and
3. 1 categories: Properties (perfection, complexity)