Yesterday I was having a chat with a friend, and he came to the conclusion that I get stifled by complexities and the he finds freedom in complexities. This same friend has called me a reductionalist, so he hasn’t wandered off the path of what he thinks my inherent actions and reactions to be.
And I have been pondering the idea of “freedom in complexities”, he could just as well said he finds “laughter in murder”… which is a bit over-driven, but you get my just.
So I typed in the words “freedom in complexities” into Google and up along came a book that had been written in 1984 and described people that find freedom in complexities as Instrumentalists.
Firstly the first two people that thought of this theory was fighting over who had the right concepts of the theory. To me, this make the theory even more complex to begin with?!
So Dewey an Popper were forming Instrumentalism and has 4 point on which they based the theory:
1) Theories are instruments, tools-of-the-trade of thinking.
2) Theories are tested by consequences, applying the instrumental criterion of judgment.
3) Theory-development requires inductive reasoning, basing general statements on limited observations
4) There are no realities beyond what can be known using instrumental theories.
Dewey and Poppy disagreed on points number 3 and 4. I disagree with nr. 4 as I think there are many realities, and as I said to him yesterday “That which we call a rose would smell just as sweet by any other name”
So I think he is an Instrumentalist, he thinks I am a reductionalist, I find chaos in complexities as he finds freedom within that…he is a man, I am a woman.
And what does this all mean?
We are different
Will these differences drive us apart?
Who knows
The question in all of this is, is the relationship worth more than the labels? Does acceptance of another (with all of their quirks and labels) come easily or not?
GerminationStation 