University of Earth
Projects Overview (Explanations)
Global Strategies Project (Explanations)

Strategic appropriateness: Constraints on a meta-answer

Global Strategies Project


1. Constraints

To avoid creating the impression that the previous argument amounts to pluralist relativism, it is necessary to clarify some constraints which counteract such a condition before taking the argument a step further. Ranges of possible constraints have been explored elsewhere (Encyclopedia, Section KP, 1991). At this point it is appropriate to list the following:

2. Constraint-sensitive system

Earlier (Encyclopedia, Section KP, 1991) it was argued that statements about a meta-answer could best be formulated as an open-ended ordered series of mutually-incompatible, transformation-oriented propositions of which 210 were outlined in 20 sets. A measure of self-reflexiveness is built into them but is most evident in the earlier sets. The statements are formulated in sets based on the number of elements by which it is hoped to "contain" the description of the complexity of an adequate meta-answer. The earlier statements are as follows.

3. Level-1: Inadequacy of formulations

4. Level-2: Opposition/Disagreement

5. Level-3: Dialectic synthesis

6. Other statement sets (4 to 20)

The tentative titles used to indicate the qualitative characteristics of the other sets formulated in Section KP (Encyclopedia, 1991) are:

In effect such sets attempt to clarify the kinds of significance domain perceptible under different conditions of observation whilst at the same time challenging the nature of the formulation and of the observation process. In a sense the ordered sets establish the necessity of the fragmentation of answers into domains.

From Encyclopedia of World Problems and Human Potential

Creative Commons License
This work is licensed by Anthony Judge
under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 2.5 License.