General Science and Philosophy


Modus Inversus is Generally Valid

Authors: Ilija Barukčić

Objective: Narrowly speaking, one scientist might claim that the truth as such is determined by human mind and consciousness, by pure subjective and poetic mathematical definitions preferred by an author and as such without any relation to objective reality and independent of the same. In contrast to claims like that, another scientist might want to endorse more Thomas Aquinas balanced formula “Veritas est adaequatio rei et intellectus” or truth is the equation of thing and intellect. Thus far, is there a truth valid for all scientist and can and how can the same be established? Methods: Definitions or mathematical and other (logical et cetera) operations are sometimes a necessary scientific step to shorten a long and arduous scientific way or to minimize the efforts of an author justifiably but also contain the danger of misuse and to accommodate (logical) contradictions. The science needs reliable methods to check such products of human mind and pure human imagination for its logical consistency. Results: Modus inversus is reviewed again and it should be noted that modus inversus among other methods possess the capacity to check definitions, mathematical and other operations or relationships as such for logical consistency very precisely. Conclusions: Modus inversus is generally valid. Keywords: Science, non-science, modus inversus.

Comments: 17 Pages. (C) Ilija Barukčić, 2019, Jever, Germany. All rights reserved.

Download: PDF

Submission history

[v1] 2019-11-24 06:10:52

Unique-IP document downloads: 38 times is a pre-print repository rather than a journal. Articles hosted may not yet have been verified by peer-review and should be treated as preliminary. In particular, anything that appears to include financial or legal advice or proposed medical treatments should be treated with due caution. will not be responsible for any consequences of actions that result from any form of use of any documents on this website.

Add your own feedback and questions here:
You are equally welcome to be positive or negative about any paper but please be polite. If you are being critical you must mention at least one specific error, otherwise your comment will be deleted as unhelpful.

comments powered by Disqus