A Cobbled System

FORMAL SYSTEMS (X 10, TOTAL CURRENTLY IS 10):

0
Coherence: categorical deduction And / Or constants.

Categorical Deduction ****
This is the primary coherent system, which appears to offer real knowledge if it is used correctly. In this system premises are only used in particular ‘systemic assumptions’ which are used across the whole system or otherwise as accessories in specific applications, for example, A.I. computing.

(Misc unnumbered).

Coherent Exceptions
Recent success in exceptionism: general coherent account of formal exceptions as per exceptions.
…

1
[O]rdinarily incapable of expressing anything, including zero.
—Definition of Naive Realism

Naive realism says nothing positive or negative. It’s extension says things can be founded by reasoning about empty sets.
…

2
A solvable paradox, on the other hand, is partly made of one extreme, and partly made of something problematic, or something that could seem like a solution. The solutions solves the problem, and the problem solves the solution, but there may also be other terms involved which are opposite in the problem and the solution components of the paradox.
—Definition of Paradoxes

Paradoxes are a major hurdle for some types of systems. Perhaps any coherent system should address the idea of universal paradoxes. A solution is proposed involving the opposite of every term in the best definition of the problem in the same order as the original words which is compatible with some types of categorical systems.
…

3
[P]ost-rationality is irrational, as is pre-rationality.
—Definition of Irrationality

Tentatively, some major exceptions are found in systems which are considered ‘primitive’ or ‘advanced’, which carry certain assumptions and in some cases carry no coherent weight at all, or only have speculative interest.
…

4
Not all truths are coherent. (Some are contained by coherence, are apparent exceptions to specific coherent systems, or express coherence irrationally).
—Definition of Incoherentism **
…
In an incoherent place, if X looks opp X, then opp X doesn't look X.
Otherwise, coherence applies.
For Ex,
If we observe art and the good looks bad, then the bad also won't look good. Otherwise, there is grounds for a universal rule about good, bad, or both.
—Incoherent Deduction **

From a coherent perspetive, incoherentism represents the vast majority of systems such as science, traditional empiricism, crafts, and most practical knowledge. This is a good category for knowledge which does not require meta-analysis.

5
A neutral system is equivalent to coherence, because coherently it is universally non-contradictory…
If the neutral system is not universal, it may perform some information function which does not contradict coherence…
If the neutral system is universal, it may be as true as coherence.
—Definition of Neutrality

Neutral systems are a possible major exception because they may be countless in number, but fortunately we know that by definition they do not contradict a coherent system, and thus pose little challenge for any other system in terms of the potential for knowledge.
…

6
Essentially cases where rules are developed to suit a particular case with no formal ramifications.
—Definition of Informalism

Informal systems carry even less weight than Incoherent systems because they do not claim to have any type of formal knowledge coherent or otherwise, rather upon analysis they are merely rules of thumb and tools of the trade which can often be debated for trivial reasons such as logical preference.
…

7
Closing the final loophole: The Undecided Exception

It was found that coherence does not require relativism except in cases of nonsense, as relativism can be represented by measurement in all other cases.
There is an idea that coherence could be compatible with relativism and thus skirt the nonsense rule. Certain arguments appeal to this idea however they are more like alternate systems than direct refutations of coherence.
Relativism is resolved coherently because double-relativism = absolutism.
…

8
Taking relativism seriously, if possible but it is sort of it’s own language: Coherence with Relativism

If relativism is adopted on purpose it may still be viable as an alternative to coherence by following preferred arguments or by being an unwilling relativist.
…

9
Nonsense language just equals Law of Non-Contradiction (negation of opposite is the best answer for every system according to nonsense): Nonsense Language: The 9th Exclusion

It takes an amount of work, but it appears that nonsense amounts to one of the earliest rules of logic, which it could be argued is already incorporated as a small part of coherence. A pure nonsense perspective might have to establish a new significance for the Law of Non-Contradiction, or be righteously ignored by coherence.

10
Real Impossibility. Hint of Impossible Logic ***

While the unknown is excluded because it assumes a lack of knowledge which would overrule the critical faculty, real impossibility may be rationally possible ss s constituent of possibility (e.g. the impossibly impossible may = possible). These are not probabilities, possibilities, or irrationalities in the ordinary sense. Nor are they paradoxes or problems as they are not contradictory. So, they may be called real impossibilities. In this sense impossibility could refer to something other thwn the object being defined, in which case it could mean preferences.

(---Coppedge, Dimensional Philosophy)

A CHART OF SOLUTIONS TO THE THEORY OF EVERYTHING (X 25, TOTAL CURRENTLY IS 35):

ORIGINAL*:

Set 0= Inf, Eff= -Inf, Diff= +/- Inf: Goddess Creator (Creator of Negativity, as -Ambiguity = True Negative, and Goddess Creator is source of Ambiguity with the Psychic Male).

Set 0= Inf, Eff= -Fin, Diff= Inf

Set 0= Inf, Eff= 0, Diff= Inf: Failed Goddess.

Set 0= Inf, Eff= Finite, Diff= Inf: Goddess.

Set 0= Inf, Eff= Inf, Diff= 0.

Set 0= Fin, Eff= -Inf, Diff= -Inf: Female Supervillain, Temporality.

Set 0= Fin, Eff= -Fin, Diff = +/- Fin: Telekinesis (Set 0 > Eff), Time-Travel, 'Neutral'.

SINGULARITIES*:

Set 0= Fin, Eff= 0, Diff= Fin (Same): 1/4 of souls.

Set 0= Fin, Eff= Fin, Diff= Avg 0, |Fin1 - Fin2|: Obj Knowledge, Invisibility, Teleportation, Perpetual Motion Machines, World Peace, 3/4 of souls.

Set 0= Fin, Eff= Inf, Diff = Inf: Perfect Woman, Geometry.

Set 0= 0, Eff= -Inf, Diff= -Inf: Quantitative Math.

SUPER-SINGULARITIES*:

Set 0= 0, Eff= -Fin, Diff= -Fin

Set 0= 0, Eff= 0, Diff= 0: (Neutral Semantics: Source of Negativity)

Set 0= 0, Eff= Finite, Diff= Fin

Set 0= 0, Eff= Inf, Diff= Inf: Immortality.

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= -Inf, Diff= -Inf: Lesbian Goddess of Destruction.

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= -Fin, Diff= (-Fin + -Fin): Lesbian.

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= 0, Diff= -Fin (Same): Intellectual Lesbian.

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= Fin, Diff= +/- Fin: Normal Lesbian, 'Neutral'.

Set 0= -Fin, Eff= Inf, Diff= Inf: Perfect Lesbian / Conflicted Lesbian.

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= -Inf, Diff= 0

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= -Fin, Diff= Inf

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= 0, Diff= Inf

HYPER-SINGULARITIES*:

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= Fin, Diff= Inf

Set 0= -Inf, Eff= Inf, Diff= Inf

---(Coppedge, A Chart of Solutions for The Theory of Everything)

A UNIFYING PROCESS (X 9, TOTAL CURRENTLY IS 44):

1. Topic.
2. Simplicity.
3. Reduction.
4. Common but unexpected ambition.
5. Topic of simplicity.
6. Problem of reduction.
7. Complex question of reduction.
8. The topic reveals itself.
9. How a different topic fails is not seeing the whole of this topic.

(---Translation of, Coppedge, Deconstruction of Hegelian Postmodernism)