Accepting nebulosity resolves confusions about meaning

Clouds are not so bad, after all..

The core of this book is a method for resolving confusions about meaningness.

The method can be applied to many sorts of issues. Any topic that involves meaning and meaninglessness I call a “dimension of meaningness.” (These include, for instance, ethics, purpose, and value.)

For any dimension, the method asks:

  • How does nebulosity affect the subject? That is, what makes the issue ambiguous, uncertain, changeable, or impossible to categorize?
  • Why is this nebulosity unattractive? What negative emotions does it provoke?
  • How are fixation and denial used to avoid acknowledging nebulosity? These two strategies try to nail the issue in place, or deny that it exists at all. They produce pairs of “confused stances,” or wrong attitudes to the subject. Why are fixation and denial appealing in this area?
  • How do fixation and denial fail? (You cannot nail clouds down, but they are still real.) What are the consequences of this failure?
  • Consider the possibility that the nebulosity is unavoidable. This means abandoning fixation and denial. It produces the “complete stance” for this dimension of meaningness. What are the consequences of the complete stance?
  • Typically, the complete stance is more accurate and helpful than the confused ones, but it seems less attractive. How can one overcome this emotional barrier, in order to adopt the complete stance?

This explanation may seem conceptual and abstract at this point. Meaningness is meant to be useful in everyday life practice. Most of it consists of detailed applications of the method to different dimensions of meaningness.

As we go along, I hope you will gain an intuitive, concrete understanding of the method, through reading examples. Also, we will revisit it with more precision and detail later in the book, when additional relevant concepts will be available.

Navigation

This page introduces a section containing the following pages:

  • Not a general dialectic

    The method for resolving confusion about meaning through accepting nebulosity is not a general dialectic, or logic for resolving all false oppositions.

This page is in the section Stances: responses to meaningness.

The previous page is No middle way.

General explanation: Meaningness is a hypertext book. Start with an appetizer, or the table of contents. Its “metablog” includes additional essays that are not part of the book.

To hear about new content, Subscribe by email subscribe to my email newsletter, Follow Meaningness on Twitter follow me on Twitter, use the Syndicate content RSS feed, or see the list of recent pages.

Click on terms with dotted underlining to read a definition.

The book is a work in progress; pages marked ⚒︎ are under construction.