Reviewing Hermeneutics: Relativity of Truth, Knowledge & Texts – Part 2
Part 2 – Primary Definitions of Relativity. (Based on the thoughts and theories of Ayatollah Sayed Murteza Al-Shirazi
The post below is continuation of introduction to Hermeneutics where the author will elaborate more on each concept within Hermeneutics. Article Part 1 was posted last week below will be the second post of several posts to come elaborating on this concept.
Other asymptotical definition for relativity & its assessment
Observing relativity from its own perspective would mean it could be relative and not be relative. Therefore:
- Relativity might contend generalization and permanence and therefore, it would have an attribute of non-permanent and non-generality for interpretations according to the theory of relativity itself. One of the interpretations of relativity is to refute the attribute of generality in its permanent nature, when it comes to definition or truth and knowledge.
Therefore, since relativity is a concept derived from numerous conceptions and a truth derived from numerous truths, relativity cannot be always relative. Due to this fact, relativity would invalidate itself, and it would be equivalent to saying: (all issues are fragmentary), therefore, if issues don’t include themselves, the concept of fragmentation would not be applicable, since the inapplicability of fragmentation is fragmentary, and if it included itself, it would contradict and invalidate itself once more.
- Relativity is not a normative and objective measurement. According to some relativity beliefs, there is no measurement and objective standard to distinguish right and wrong and true and false.
- Relativity is not necessary unerring and faultless, since any definition or matter might be true or false according to difference of eras, circumstances or societies. Therefore, whomever applies the notion of relativity, cannot eliminate and exclude it from this particular interpretation as well.
- Even if relativity is said to be unerring and faultless, it would be false and incorrect based on the relative concept that states contradictory and inharmonious cognitions are unerring and faultless. Based on this notion, there will be no comprehensive fundament, which in addition would include the paradox of relativity as well.
- Relativity is not a reality, which was explored and derived by apprehension and astuteness and neither was the notion of absolutism. Relativity and absolutism are the creations and inventions of intellect, whether through experiment or not.
Therefore, if intellect is the creator of mathematical concepts and four theological definitions, as Kant would argue, why wouldn’t it be the creator of relativity? This notion would be collided by the following criticisms: intellect is capable of inventing the paradoxical interpretation, which means the possibility of deception and illusion is present, and the notion of relativity was invented for any concept. Therefore, intellect has been able to create the opposite notion relativity, which would be interpret relativity as parallel to illusions and imaginations.
- According to some definitions, relativity includes proportionality but it is not same as the notion of addition which can be parallelism, equality and superiority. Nevertheless, in addition to what is the absolute nature of this notion, relativity would be non-relative as far as it is relative. Under any circumstances, if there was an inherent transformation of relativity to a non-relative nature, the notion of relativity would be non-relative in its new era and relative in its previous era.
- Relative cognition is not part of secondary philosophical rationalities, which can be applied externally and examined by intellect. It is part of the secondary logical rationalities that does not have the nature of possibility, which puts the notion of external application, intellectual examination and unity in a different synonymous apprehension for existence, parity and singularity.
Nonetheless, relative cognition is considered to be definitive and affirmative notions of secondary logical rationalities, due to which they are attributes of matters and knowledge, and therefore, they are intellectual concepts as agreed upon.
The affirmation of this attribute for relativity is an absolute notion and not relative, since relativity is always and never part of secondary logical rationalities, and any transformation to primary rationalities or secondary philosophical rationalities is not comprehensible. In addition, relative cognition is an absolute notion according to other relativity definitions, if we accept the relativity of external reality, as this relativity would be part of secondary philosophical rationalities, which is also absolute according to its nature.
Regardless, there is a reality to relativity, which has been forced upon it. Therefore, any other type of rationalities that was formed beyond the intellectual conformation, if becomes stratified with relativity would be unerring, and if it doesn’t it would be amiss and incorrect.