> The problem for the confused is that Russell's paradox (and the whole
> history of logic in which it fits) is _one_ realm, Joanna's examples are
> another realm. Carl claimed, Bateson claimed, you claimed that the
> Cretan liar's paradox illuminates the existential actualities Joanna
> describes. I am not convinced that that _connection_ between logic and
> actuality has been made in plain old american that cats and dogs can
> read.
>
> Carrol
>
Well yes, as Bateson was fond of saying, "The Map is not the Territory", borrowing from Alfred Korzybski, I believe. Sometimes the map is not even a good guide to the territory.
There are no good maps of human experience, the Zen master would say, and in order to understand how a logical paradox can become a double bind, you actually have to imagine your way into it or experience it. Again a good part of art is giving us human experiences, though a bit removed from actual lived experience.
I find here more evidence for my usual rant about the limitation of theories. Theories rarely if ever, actually produce intrinsic knowledge. The same here for rational argument.
Jerry