◄ BACK

This is a work in progress - all rights reserved.
Copyright © 2006-2008 Tony Giovia

 

CHAPTER 14 - Maps and Territories v2.0

 

14.1 - A map is a mental object. (Definition)

14.2 - A territory is at least a three-dimensional object. (Definition)

14.3 - A map defines a territory or another map. (Definition)

14.4 – A map is a context. (Construction)

14.5 - When a map defines another map, it is equivalent to a rule defining a level. (Definition)

14.6 - When a map defines a three-dimensional object, it is equivalent to a rule defining a territory. (Definition)

14.7 - The definition of “Nothingness” is a territory with no dimensions. (Definition)

14.8 - The context “Nothingness” exists as a map, but does not define a three-dimensional territory. (Construction)

a) An object not perceivable by a particular set of physical senses and/or a particular mind does not exist for those particular senses and that particular mind. (Construction)

b) Objects without dimensions are not perceivable. (Construction)

c) “Nothingness” does not exist as a territory. (Construction)

d) “Nothingness” exists only as a mental object. (Construction)

14.9 - Maps and territories exist in a relationship with each other, but they are not dimensionally equivalent.

14.10 - Maps and territories exist in a relationship with each other, but intervening levels may be required to complete the relationship.

 

This further defines the relationship between Ideas and physical objects. It is intended to clarify the common observation “The map is not the territory.” in terms of Ideas and physical three-dimensional objects.

Maps can define other maps or they can define three-dimensional objects. This is what we mean by every rule is a level, and every level is a rule. A level whose rule includes other rules is a map of the other rules – other logical contexts. In turn, one or more of the included rules can refer to a territory – a three-dimensional object.

 

◄ BACK