Form: Definition

Fictionalism is the name of the judgment within philosophy, as to which statements that appear to be descriptions of the world should not be construed as such, but should instead be understood as cases of “make-believe”, of pretending to treat something as literally true (a “useful fiction”). Fictionalism consists of at least the following three theses:

1) Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be “truth-apt”; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

2) The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else:

• • • conversation(bonding or entertainment),
    • discourse (discovery),
    • argument(persuasion), and
    • testimony(reporting),

Differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of

• • • description vs fiction,
    • honesty vs deceit, and
    • truth or falsehood,

Of our statements. (We white and grey lie all-time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.)

3) The purpose of *discourse(discovery)* in any given domain is not truth, but communication, and communication by suggestion, with which anlogy is the necessary means of transfer of meaning. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.The Common occurrences of fictionalism are:

1) Mathematical fictionalism advocated by Hartry Field, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

2) Modal fictionalism developed by Gideon Rosen, which states that possible worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse, and;

3) Idealism (Platonist Fictionalism)

4) Moral Fictionalism in meta-ethics, advocated by Richard Joyce, suggests that fictions (Falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

5) Religious Fiction in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of fictionalism.

6) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult) We must note that all of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past. Positioning the Fictionalisms In Grammatical Context

|Fictions| Testimony > Narration > Story > Fiction > Fictionalism > Deception > Fraud A positive Fictionalism refers to those statements that appear to be descriptions of the real world (reality) but are cases of “make believe” – of pretending that a given useful fiction is other than just a useful fiction. A negative Fictionalism refers to the most successful means of deception (coercion) by loading, framing and overloading. Given our the methods of perception:

|Perception| Physical (sensory) > Intuitionistic (intuitionistic, emotional) > Mental (intellectual, reason) And the methods of inflating and conflating them:

|Fictionalisms| Magical (Technical, Physical) > Supernatural (Occult, Experiential) > Ideal (Intellectual, Verbal) We produce these common uses of Fictionalism:

1. Ideal (verbal, intellectual):

1) Mathematical Fictionalism, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

2) Platonic Fictionalism (Idealism) which states that….

3) Rational Fictionalism (continental philosophy)

2. Magical (Physical, Technical):

4) Human Fictionalism (‘Denialism’) state that equality in all possible dimensions (a falsehood), is too necessary to throw out.

5) Modal Fictionalism developed by _________ which states that possible worlds, or multiple worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse.

6) Pseudosciences:

3. Supernormal (Imaginary, Experiential):

7) Moral Fictionalism in meta-ethics, suggests that fictions (falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

8) Religious Fictionalism in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of Fictionalism are too useful, and somehow necessary to throw out.

9) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult) are somehow necessary to escape reality, or fabricate a false version of it. We must note that all of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past, and failing to perform the cost of reformation of the terms, paradigms, and stories. Fictionalisms make use of three presumptions:

1) Communication of Meaning: The purpose of discourse(discovery) in any given domain is not truth, but communication. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.

2) Meaningful but not True: Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be truth-apt; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

3) A Useful Fiction Not Open To Further Interpretation (Face Value): The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else:

• • Conversation(bonding or entertainment),
  • Discourse (discovery),
  • Argument(persuasion), and
  • Testimony(reporting),

… Differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of:

• • Description vs. Fiction,
  • Honesty vs. Deceit,
  • Truth or Falsehood,

… of our statements. (We white and grey lie all time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.) Speakers attempt to preserve the use of Fictionalisms for one of the following possible reasons:

1) To obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or 2) To preserve the sunk cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or 3) To avoid the costs of reformation the method of decidability within their domains. 4) To avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered. 5) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgments are truths. 6) To conduct frauds by using their arbitrary preferences or judgments for coercion or profit.  And, of these groups:

0) Religious Language in toto (supernaturalism) 1) Literary Philosophers (positive, or advocates ), 2) Supernormal Physicists, and 3) Mathematical Platonists; All attempt to preserve the use of fictions for one of the following possible reasons:

1) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgements are truths. 2) Obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or 3) Preserve the cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or 4) Avoid the costs of investigating the method of decidability within their domains. 5) Avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered. And so:

If we define philosophy (positive and literary) as the search for methods of decidability within a domain of preference, and;

If we define Truth  (negative and descriptive) as the search for methods of decidability across all domains regardless of preference. Then:

We find that positive or literary philosophy(fiction or philosophy) informs, suggests opportunities, and justifies preferences for the purpose of forming cooperation and alliances between individuals and groups.

We find that negative or juridical philosophy(truth or law) decides, states limits, and discounts preferences, for the purpose of resolving conflicts between individuals and groups.

Fictionalism is the name of the judgment within philosophy, as to which statements that appear to be descriptions of the world should not be construed as such, but should instead be understood as cases of “make-believe”, of pretending to treat something as literally true (a “useful fiction”). Fictionalism consists of at least the following three theses:

1) Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be “truth-apt”; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

2) The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else:

• • • conversation(bonding or entertainment),
    • discourse (discovery),
    • argument(persuasion), and
    • testimony(reporting),

Differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of

• • • description vs fiction,
    • honesty vs deceit, and
    • truth or falsehood,

Of our statements. (We white and grey lie all-time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.)

3) The purpose of *discourse(discovery)* in any given domain is not truth, but communication, and communication by suggestion, with which anlogy is the necessary means of transfer of meaning. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.The Common occurrences of fictionalism are:

1) Mathematical fictionalism advocated by Hartry Field, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

2) Modal fictionalism developed by Gideon Rosen, which states that possible worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse, and;

3) Idealism (Platonist Fictionalism)

4) Moral Fictionalism in meta-ethics, advocated by Richard Joyce, suggests that fictions (Falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

5) Religious Fiction in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of fictionalism.

6) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult) We must note that all of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past. Positioning the Fictionalisms In Grammatical Context

|Fictions| Testimony > Narration > Story > Fiction > Fictionalism > Deception > Fraud A positive Fictionalism refers to those statements that appear to be descriptions of the real world (reality) but are cases of “make believe” – of pretending that a given useful fiction is other than just a useful fiction. A negative Fictionalism refers to the most successful means of deception (coercion) by loading, framing and overloading. Given our the methods of perception:

|Perception| Physical (sensory) > Intuitionistic (intuitionistic, emotional) > Mental (intellectual, reason) And the methods of inflating and conflating them:

|Fictionalisms| Magical (Technical, Physical) > Supernatural (Occult, Experiential) > Ideal (Intellectual, Verbal) We produce these common uses of Fictionalism:

1. Ideal (verbal, intellectual):

1) Mathematical Fictionalism, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

2) Platonic Fictionalism (Idealism) which states that….

3) Rational Fictionalism (continental philosophy)

2. Magical (Physical, Technical):

4) Human Fictionalism (‘Denialism’) state that equality in all possible dimensions (a falsehood), is too necessary to throw out.

5) Modal Fictionalism developed by _________ which states that possible worlds, or multiple worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse.

6) Pseudosciences:

3. Supernormal (Imaginary, Experiential):

7) Moral Fictionalism in meta-ethics, suggests that fictions (falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

8) Religious Fictionalism in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of Fictionalism are too useful, and somehow necessary to throw out.

9) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult) are somehow necessary to escape reality, or fabricate a false version of it. We must note that all of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past, and failing to perform the cost of reformation of the terms, paradigms, and stories. Fictionalisms make use of three presumptions:

1) Communication of Meaning: The purpose of discourse(discovery) in any given domain is not truth, but communication. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.

2) Meaningful but not True: Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be truth-apt; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

3) A Useful Fiction Not Open To Further Interpretation (Face Value): The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else:

• • Conversation(bonding or entertainment),
  • Discourse (discovery),
  • Argument(persuasion), and
  • Testimony(reporting),

… Differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of:

• • Description vs. Fiction,
  • Honesty vs. Deceit,
  • Truth or Falsehood,

… of our statements. (We white and grey lie all time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.) Speakers attempt to preserve the use of Fictionalisms for one of the following possible reasons:

1) To obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or 2) To preserve the sunk cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or 3) To avoid the costs of reformation the method of decidability within their domains. 4) To avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered. 5) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgments are truths. 6) To conduct frauds by using their arbitrary preferences or judgments for coercion or profit.  And, of these groups:

0) Religious Language in toto (supernaturalism) 1) Literary Philosophers (positive, or advocates ), 2) Supernormal Physicists, and 3) Mathematical Platonists; All attempt to preserve the use of fictions for one of the following possible reasons:

1) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgements are truths. 2) Obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or 3) Preserve the cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or 4) Avoid the costs of investigating the method of decidability within their domains. 5) Avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered. And so:

If we define philosophy (positive and literary) as the search for methods of decidability within a domain of preference, and;

If we define Truth  (negative and descriptive) as the search for methods of decidability across all domains regardless of preference. Then:

We find that positive or literary philosophy(fiction or philosophy) informs, suggests opportunities, and justifies preferences for the purpose of forming cooperation and alliances between individuals and groups.

We find that negative or juridical philosophy(truth or law) decides, states limits, and discounts preferences, for the purpose of resolving conflicts between individuals and groups.