There are of course, elements of the argument which can be viewed as mathematical in structure, and to take good care of precisely that which is meant is simply good practice. In metaphysics, great stake is put on the underlying structure of each argument, and thousands of pages have been written on the precise definition of certain words. Mathematicians themselves seek not only an axiomatic structure within which they may communicate theories to students, but also a logical structure within which they may begin to pose their axioms... The term "Set Theory" may vary greatly from one logical system or another in providing this structure. Issues of constructability and incompleteness abound, as whilst Metaphysics allows one 'language' or another, issues of logic can differ by a great deal when reliant on the smallest variance in meaning or that which is assumed to be 'common knowledge'.

Loose Ends
To prove a point regarding 'language' we retrace our steps to the very start of the 'Metaphysics' section to the example proof given regarding the nature of the integer zero - is it positive or negative? We state an alternative to the system most of us are familiar with, based on the use of the predicate 'positive' with zero.

Nothing Less Than Zero
An examination in brief of the system or 'language' that has arisen from the alteration in the previous page, with some strange after effects.

Bungee Leap Messianism
If God is responsible for his own existence, with respect to the infinite regress of God thus requiring an even more complex designer, and he as well and so forth, do we have a system alike to the zero-positive previous?

Three Bags Full Sir!
If we require that God can not know the possibility of his own non-existence, and also that he has a Son in which they both mutually conceive themselves as existent "outside" themselves, as we then require three 'containers' rather than only two, what can we say about any change in language? 

Continue To Next Section

Continue To Next Page