Archive for May, 2010

Matheological Mystery Tour

May 16, 2010

Is mathematical reasoning—deductions based on axioms—as precise and infallible as it seems? Should the products of equations have the last word with regard to the determination of hard fact and sound theory? Are such products really the ultimate measures of certainty? That depends on whether the axioms of mathematics reflect eternal truths, and the truth is that, despite their usefulness for certain purposes, they are the products of a potent but imperfect logic—call it: matheologic. For matheological thinkers, math is a religion, numbers are god, and to question their word is heresy. 

Mathematics, like everything in Omniverse, is a product of imagination, of creative thought. Math is more akin to abstract art and jazz music than generally realized. Nothing in existence within the nine dimensions of asymmetrical Omniverse is, or can be, absolute; nothing is perfect, not even E=MC2. Math, while useful, is not perfect, nor can it be made perfect. And if we forget this, then the use of mathematics, of matheological thinking, presents more problems than solutions. Numerical assessments imply correctness, especially correctness of prediction, and correctness, like completeness, is unachievable.

Yet effectiveness in all things “under the Sun” is possible because Imagination, Consciousness, Desire, Creativity, and Will are of a higher order than math or arithmetic. Qualities precede, and supersede, quantities. Deep down we all know this, but it is easily forgotten in the face of such intimidating “realities” as: economic downturns, adverse stock market reports, and climate-change statistics. Not that “doing the numbers” lacks utility or significance; it is simply that “the numbers” are not of primary importance. No tool is of a higher order than the toolmaker, nor any structure fabricated through its use. 

So, how much trust should we place in, for example, a theory that is entirely or mainly dependent on mathematical proofs? How much faith should we place in sacred statistics, especially in the hands of less-than-objective proponents of a given agenda? Risky business. Consider the global warming debacle where numbers alongside of pictures appeared compelling, and the accompanying arguments seemed logical and clear; the truth no longer looks so certain now that the matheological “spell” has been lifted. Pay no attention to the man behind the curtain. Pay no attention at your own peril. 

The best approach to decision-making is to allow indicators other than mathematically derived and logically calculated appraisals, assessments, and projections to lead the way. In setting the direction for a government, a company, or a household, a Noetic science-based approach is multi-sensible. The most successful CEOs will admit that their (measurably) best decisions are often the ones made against advice of accountants, legal advisors, and other competent professionals who perceived such gut-level decisions as counterintuitive—a term we hear frequently from unimaginative thinkers who know not the meaning of intuition. Not that their input lacks value; you just cannot “count on it.”

%d bloggers like this: