I have recently received the current copy of Philosophy, but its “philosophy”  leaves much to be desired.  The articles in the journal take-on questions concerning whether A or B is “better”, where A and B are rather vaguely generalised aspirations. There is absolutely no suggestion that the answers (whatever they may be) will resolve the deep cognitive crisis into which humanity has fallen.  The kind of “analysis” being developed in these papers is generalised, scholastic and linguistic. It fields nuances of meaning which can be lingered-over, extensionally compared and enjoyed. But whether this activity can ever provide the satisfactory philosophic answers we need is quite doubtful. The articles are mostly targeting questions about human nature and the human condition which will only become clear when, and if, we manage to achieve fundamental 20-20 vision about our human role vis-à-vis the universe.

There is even the worry that this kind of “philosophy” does not, most of the time, even recognise Wittgenstein’s revolution: his mundane sensibility, which brought into play the way meaning actually works.

So the $64 question which urgently needs to be tackled is <<What is the meaning of meaning?>>. There is also a back-up question, almost as significant:

<<How can we hope to get a synoptic picture of the human condition which is at the same level of finality (unargue-ability) as the sphericity of the Earth?>> .

Yes, although 99% of the discoveries of modern science are in the “not-yet falsified” category, there is a rump of scientific facts which have clearly become unarguable.  We know that modern science has managed to finalise a considerable number of previously open questions such as those involved in the behaviour of electricity and solid-state physics. These relatively finalised truths are priceless, because they offer philosophy a secure platform from which it can begin to look for a global settlement..

Humanity is currently suffering under a very deep cultural/moral/cognitive crisis.

But the heart of the uncertainty is the cultural/cognitive methodology crisis in science. Physicists are now saying that the area of physical reality they understand is only about 20% of the whole, because dark matter and dark energy are still virtually wholly mysterious.

And modern physics has let itself be dependent on advanced maths, another area of scholarly curiosity which is in crisis. This is awash with conceptual contradictions.  It has also been nearly talked-to-extinction by the supremacy of digital computerist hyping.

So whatever has gone so badly wrong?

I’m afraid the answer is: Platonic mathematics. Plato was a genius who created a mindset which falsely dominated the most thoughtful scientific minds for more than 2500 years.  He pronounced that <<Only the timeless is real>>, <<Mathematics is the study of timeless reality>> and <<Mathematics is therefore the supreme, finally superior, logos (knowledge) available to us.>>.

I’m afraid we have got to give-up (reject) each of these three pillars of wisdom a la Plato. Developments of modern linguistic analysis and two millennia of emancipation have turned epistemology upside down.

Now what counts as “real” is our experience of things which we cannot dismiss (fail to recognise) on any grounds.  We may not want to recognise them, but we know that we must.  There are some bits of mathematics which we can’t ignore, but 99%+ of pure mathematics is just a playground the cleverest people have created by dreaming-up fanciful ideas.  We know this because the phenomenon of Temple Geometry —which was greatly expanded by the Japanese in the 19^th century. They took it creatively far beyond the geometry of Euclid… into special cases which became more and more visibly arbitrary. In the end they gave up … because they realised it was going nowhere.

Reality is what we cannot dodge.  We can dodge 99%+ of pure maths, even though all pure maths is nominally timeless.

What we cannot dodge is around us, changing constantly, hopping ahead. It is on-going, active, startling, hurting, pleasing, changing.

A giant unexpected truth has recently emerged: that Maths is not the only abstract creative playground. There is also another dynamic abstract playground —anti-maths. It comes about when we apply the same methods which led to the vast empire of pure maths… but now applied to long jumping-random sequences of four or more distinct tallies. This new logos is much more suitable to model physical reality… than maths. We can now see in outline form how the physical universe generates itself.  It signals that we are at the beginning of a Quite New Era which should, hopefully, include a return to scientific and moral confidence.

You can send your comment on this website: email your thoughts to per4group@gmail.com
CHRISTOPHER ORMELL around 1^st November 2025chrisormell@aol.com