Assumptions of Coherentism / Categorical Deduction

Assumptions for the system, roughly:

(1) Every term has an opposite, or at least an imaginary opposite, even if no opposite has yet been formalized, it can be thought about in terms of the first term and its opposite properties.

(2) Each opposite may be used to express all associations for the term symbolically, because at least relatively no other term may do so in each case, or alternate terms may be used. Later, terms are compared, so that the relativism is eliminated through relative relativism = degree absolutism, which may also be called iterative positivism.

(3) Opposites can occupy a Bounded Cartesian Coordinate System because by expressing opposites the only term they do not include is zero, although zero could still be used as an opposite for infinity or infinity plus one in some cases.

(4) Opposites are opposed along the diagonal, because opposites must occupy the furthest possible distance, and in a bounded Cartesian Coordinate System diagonal positions meet this criteria.

(5) Relationships must not be directly opposite, that is opposites cannot be compared without cancelling out and equaling zero. Therefore, the only option is to compare opposites indirectly. This happens to result in a clockwise and counter-clockwise formula in quadratics that I call categorical deduction.

(6) Since categorical deduction is the only possible option for any double-pair of quadratic categories and meets the above criteria, it is coherent.

(7) Since categorical deduction tends to have fewer deductions than categories, it is exponentially efficient.

(8) Optionally, it may be important to use a language in which states and qualities are roughly scientifically equivalent, since this makes sentence-forming easier.

The mod 2 set neutral Boolean set operators I discovered are is, as is, just as, when, so, and as such (in ascending numbers of total categories)


For original source, SEE: https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-logical-system-in-which-anything-can-be-expressed/answer/Nathan-Coppedge/comment/20172336

New Page Summarizing Critical Sources of Dimensionism

This page accommodates quotes by intellectuals on the subject of dimensionism, a movement begun in Hungary around 1935, and which has received a number of recent encyclopedia volumes by myself. It may be seen as including subjects as vast and broad as the art of M.C. Escher, aspects of the work of Jean Baudrillard, Hyper-Cubist artwork, and Nathan Coppedge's writings about objective knowledge. Until recently, dimensionism has been fairly obscure. Even now, the majority of searches related to dimensionism appear to relate to theories of specific dimensions, such as the second dimension and third dimension. These 'movements' alienate the broad category of the central subject, risking that dimensional knowledge be overtaken by theories of deconstructive mathematics. Specialization has a good purpose in that it heightens awareness of the specific perspectives of each dimension, but has the shortcoming that it overclouds general theories, including coherent dimensions:

Here is the page I was referring to, including quotes about dimensionism:
http://www.impossiblemachine.com/dimensionism

Updated Twitter Page:

http://www.twitter.com/nathancoppedge

With art titled Abstract 17 in BG for individual twitter posts.