A theory is the putting of reality in nice little boxes in our heads. This is the same as when I say that theories partition the world. A theory is a deception. A dream. (This is not a metaphor.)
For example, one theory of 'truth' establishes two boxes. Box 1 is called 'True' and box 2 is called 'False.' There is no provision for box 3, box 4, box 5, and so on unless they are given in terms of boxes 1 and 2. This is called a rule. So a conventional theory of truth has the following things. Boxes: 'True' and 'False'; Rules: "The boxes of all other theories must fit inside boxes True and False."
But now I have made a theory of theories. I will quit doing that. Theories should be done away with as soon as they are invented. I am not giving out a theory here--not saying what one
ought to do but I am saying that when you make a theory then if you dedicate yourself to that theory it will become too hard to think any other way. I prefer not to do this, but you may have a different preference. I cannot (nor will not) decide for you.
I would like to be inventive, hence I do not want to think only in terms of True and False, or even in terms of the box of Box (i.e. my theory of theories as putting reality in boxes is itself a box and I do not want to put myself in a box permanently as I have already mentioned).
So there is only the here and now and it would seem that there is no way to pin anything down unless you dedicate yourself to a theory to a box, to a living space within reality. Actually I dislike moving around so much--it is tiresome. There needs to be some place to set one's head at night to sleep. But if you are always sleeping then what will you miss?
Yet I
want there to be something which is like an overarching thing, a box, a shelter, in order to find some constant rest, but I fear about becoming blind. This is what happens when you are stubbornly holding on to your boxes: become blind to the goings on outside of the boxes.
Of course there's the stupid saying "think outside the box." My terminology is unfortunate to now be associated with that saying.
Be homeless then. Do not have a home.
Yes, "box" was a bad choice of term--contrary to purposes: moving the furniture around a bit.
Imperative: "Do not make anything out of my words. If you do, I'll be pissed."
Imperative: "Develop a theory and publish it. If you don't, you'll not have money." This is the problem with contemporary philosophical life.
Aporia: "Yes, but what can he mean?" "What? What is meaning?--I'm not asking a question."
In short, I am saying that theories are endless. Every word I make is trying to make something out of itself even when I try not to make it so. This is
my ultimate philosophical problem.
How to speak without unexpectedly making a theory. I want to speak, but I do not want to make a theory, but speaking (philosophically) implies making a theory. And by philosophical speach I do not mean speach which is explicitly philosophical, but speach with a hint of figuring things out.
Having things "figured out" conventionally means having a theory (albeit simple) worked out in the mind sufficiently so as to be able to put it into words when a friend asks "How's it going?"
My hypothesis is that non-theoretical philosophical speech is possible. This is the hypothesis--to be tested, by experience. But perhaps not. Such speech might be speech which is literally in comprehensible but which, in its
intention, is understandable. This is what needs to be studied: speech which is literally confusing, disjointed, even crazy, but in its intention meaningful, insightful, illuminating, etc. This is a sort of poetic philosophy.
Where does all of this fit with the discussion of truth? Well, my problem is that I wish to say what truth is, but I do not want to make a theory of truth.
