Consistent Intellectual Thought
As consistent intellectual thought, principles are only made compatible contextually. In a moment of time, one principle prioritises over another, but this does not deny the other principle. The other principle is still held, but is merely held over to the next moment of time when it is called upon. This is different to a cherry-picking strategy in that the application of the first principle in the first timing, before the selection of another principle, holds that all true principles are held to be true, and that the argument is on the application to the context. It is the Aristotelian mega-principle that each good true principle has the sum of all principle. If the argument is not on the correct application to the context, and if another principle is held up to misappropriating context, rather than for the moment of time to be held in abeyance, then there is something incorrect. You have your Popperian principle of falsification.
Featured Image: The Dynamic of Cognition
Neville Buch
Latest posts by Neville Buch (see all)
- The Division of Labour Between Populist Enchantment and Scholarly Modern Theology: Truthfulness, Falsehood, and the Pathway to Communicative Comprehension – September 22, 2026
- Overcoming the Cynicism of Dismissal: Critical Thinking, and Contributory Economics – September 21, 2026
- Agency, Cultural Construction, and Synoptic Vision: On Matt Patterson’s Comprehensive Examination in Sociological Theory (2009) – September 20, 2026