1 Jul 2007 @ 14:04, by Max Sandor
Before trying to reinvent the wheel(s) of the logics, let's see another approach that is aiming in the same direction.
It was proposed by Hargitai, R. Farkas, Ö. Ropolyi, L+. Veress, G. Vankó, Gy. at the Institute of Chemistry, Eötvös University Budapest, Hungary, in 1995.
Note, that if you substitute 'open/close' for 'Freiheit/Zwang' (freedom/forced restriction), the drawing demonstrates the Nordenholz 'Axiome der Scientologie' expanded, as he proposed in his 1934 book Scientologie, as the 'Dopplung der Gegensaetze' (Doubling of the Opposites).
(For the importance of the basic components of the Universe from both an Ifa and a PRACTICAL perspective of selfempowerment, see Sandor/Dawson 'Polar Dynamics 1' and the articles on Girapoli on this BLOG.)
From the article of Hargitai et alii on Tetralectics
(quote)
Summary:
We presented here some ideas to introduce a new type of logic named tetralectics. How are the features of this logic determined? In any kind of logic there is a formal framework which is, more or less, independent from the contents of its statements. In tetralectics we have four concepts, thirteen pairs of oppositions as the very constituents of this logic, and a collection of the possible operations on these constituents manifested by the symmetry operations of a three dimensional tetrahedron. For the construction of the whole system of tetralectics we have to arrange the four concepts on the vertices and arrange the oppositions on the symmetry elements of tetrahedron. Fixing all of these, a special version of tetralectics is specified and defined. Applying some elementary combinatorics, the exact number of arrangements on the tetrahedron can be calculated getting by this way the possible number of different kinds of tetralectics. In the framework of the given tetralectics there can be identified three levels of the description. The first level, the level of theories is related directly to the world of experiences. In the next level of tetralectics we have four metatheories dealing with the theories, and finally on the third, metametatheoretical level we can treat the relations of metatheories. As it concludes from the rules of construction in a concrete version of tetralectics we can construct a definite number of theories, while we have four metatheories and one metametatheory.

