Experimental ontology on the basis of semasiological experiments

Syncretic Ptolemaic world puzzle – two-dimensional projection of an at least nine-dimensional fractal trialistic scheme of symmetry breaks
or a universal semantics or a panpsychistic and neutral monistic ontology starting from a theory of self-organizing systems (65)
personality
acknowledgment


religion-dignity
Inspiration



individual(can)-individuation
Psychology



medium-communication
Media theory
spirituality
unnameability (god type 1)
absoluteness
nothingness (god type 2)


transzendence-principle
Induction




language-mapping
Epistemoloy
compatibility
coherence


platform-purpose
Emergence




society(must)-socialization
Sociology
spontaneity creativity
resilience fitness


nature-instinct lust
Innovation




community(may)-convention institution
Social psychology
universality-infinity
Ontology



world-substance (god type 3)
Philosophy

 
factuality-finiteness
Phenomenology
      temporality-process
Genealogy
evolution-selection
History
quality
order



immanence-fact
Imitation

 
relativity
item
quantity
chaos
intensionality wisdom
content meaning



sign-category notion
Simulation

 
extensionality
form
foolishness
arbitrariness
complementarity
state
estrangement
indifference
immediacy
harmony



network-binding
Situation

 
relationality
cohesion
remoteness
tension
homogeneity
neutrality



organization-role
Interaction

 
heterogeneity
partiality
functionality
interdependence
authenticity magnanimity
justice grace



culture-ritual moral
Tradition

 
expressivity
manipulation
cowardice
disgust
artificiality
law
cruelty
revengefulness
truthfulness openness
truth humility



science-canon dogma
Interpretation

 
insincerity
sham
resentment
arrogance
opportuneness
control
corruptness
envy
stability
resonance


reason-sense
Speculation



being-structure
Aesthetics



ideal(perfection)-idea
Mathematics



organism(flexibility)-life
Biology
totality
wholeness (identity)


attractor-shape
Integration



should-standardization
Synergetics



mass(inertia)-energy
Physics
intentionality naivety
interest serenity


will-project hope
Motivation



wanting-development desire
Dialectic



information(probability)-distinction paradigm
Informatics
subjectivity
simplicity (unity)


wave-i
Synthesis



being-expansion
Statics
self-referentiality
equality (unity)


existence-reflexion
Autopoiesis



becoming-motion
Dynamics
self-determination constructiveness
mindfulness joy


soul-trust love
Autonomy



doing-acting violence
Ethics
emotionality friendliness
intuition pride


feeling-belief worry
Practice



haveing-appropriation rating
Logic
specificity




particle-self
Difference

 
observability
complicatedness
(uniqueness)
generality
certainty




quantum-me
Analysis

 
uncertainty objectivity
complexity
(multiplicity)
availability




potency-possibility
Inside

 
foreign-referentiality
contradiction
(multiplicity)
unavailability
fortuity




act-reality
Outside

 
necessity causality
contingency
(uniqueness)
freedom




body-experience anxiety
Powerlessness

 
adaptivity
frustration
overconformity
repression
constraint
consciousness




mind-decision hatred
Omnipotence

 
unconsciousness foreign-determination
aggression
destructiveness
annihilation
certitude




intellect-knowledge prejudice
Theory

 
rationality
construction
hostility
contempt
uncertitude
concreteness




senses-doubt bias
Empirie

 
abstractness receptivity
irritation
oversensitivity
mortification

While etymology deals with the origin and meaning of words and their history, including the history of their change in meaning, onomasiology and semasiology investigate the language-internal relationships between words and meanings. Both play an important role within lexicography and are sub-disciplines of general semantics. Onomasiology examines the designation and the change of designation of objects by words depending on different contexts. In contrast, semasiology investigates how words can have different meanings depending on different contexts. As onomasiology deals with word formation and word creation, semasiology explores the possibility of creating new meanings through new assignments of words and contexts. There is thus something magical inherent in semasiology. Words become a kind of incantation to make the world reveal itself.

Simplified relations are often found in management and coaching schemes. However, these usually have the following three properties:

  1. High-dimensional relationship relations are reduced to at most two dimensions or folded into at most two-dimensional subspaces.
  2. Existing power relations are veiled or at least not questioned.
  3. Through oversimplifying hierarchizations, existing hierarchical structures of power are implicitly legitimized.

Known examples: Maslow's hierarchy of needs, Kohlberg's stages of moral development, Loevinger's stages of ego development, Whitehead's social and personal orders, Extended OSI model, ERG theory, Theory U.
Consequently, people lie to each other for the purpose of complexity reduction.

Due to its speculative nature, the scientific usefulness of an experimental ontology is at least uncertain.

With regard to the concept of God, following my experimental ontology, I see three different clearly distinguishable types, each with its own logic. The first type refers to otherworldly concepts about which nothing testable can be said, since it refers to what is unavailable and unattainable. This indeterminability allows for ideas of a personal God as well as a creator God. Any attempts to prove or disprove the existence of such beings necessarily lead to irresolvable contradictions. The second type refers to the God of negative theology "The Nothing", the epitome of the absolute par excellence. The problem of proving God does not arise here, as it is not even possible to formulate the concepts and questions required for this. With the third type, it is exactly the opposite. Since it is possible in principle to assert a definition of "divinity", the necessary existence of a divine being can so be proven on this basis, as Gödel has shown. Similarities to pantheistic ideas of an inherent divine substance or a divine principle are unmistakable here.