It can be explained thusly: If there is an exception to every rule, the phrase "there is an exception to every rule," is in and of itself a rule. A rule by definition is a governing principle or regulation. Therefore, as something that always can always be applied or abided by "there is an exception to every rule" is a rule. Here comes the mind boggler: If it is indeed a rule, then there must exist exceptions to it as well, that is to say that there are exceptions to "there are exceptions to every rule." How can this be? An exception to this rule would be a rule without an exception. This means that there must exist rules without exceptions. This, however, is contradictory to the original rule "there is an exception to every rule," yet simultaneously it fulfills it because there must exist an exception to THAT original rule, meaning a rule with no exceptions. An interesting paradox to consider, exceptions to every rule means that sometimes there aren't exceptions, both confirming and opposing the original rule. It is a conundrum, an unending circle; a three dimensional thought, in a two dimensional world. Ω
Sunday, December 9, 2012
Exceptions to EVERY Rule
Many have heard the comment, the passing, almost casual remark of: "There are exceptions to every rule." Despite being tritely used, this principle nevertheless holds true. Surrounding this idea, however, exists a mind boggling paradox.
It can be explained thusly: If there is an exception to every rule, the phrase "there is an exception to every rule," is in and of itself a rule. A rule by definition is a governing principle or regulation. Therefore, as something that always can always be applied or abided by "there is an exception to every rule" is a rule. Here comes the mind boggler: If it is indeed a rule, then there must exist exceptions to it as well, that is to say that there are exceptions to "there are exceptions to every rule." How can this be? An exception to this rule would be a rule without an exception. This means that there must exist rules without exceptions. This, however, is contradictory to the original rule "there is an exception to every rule," yet simultaneously it fulfills it because there must exist an exception to THAT original rule, meaning a rule with no exceptions. An interesting paradox to consider, exceptions to every rule means that sometimes there aren't exceptions, both confirming and opposing the original rule. It is a conundrum, an unending circle; a three dimensional thought, in a two dimensional world. Ω
It can be explained thusly: If there is an exception to every rule, the phrase "there is an exception to every rule," is in and of itself a rule. A rule by definition is a governing principle or regulation. Therefore, as something that always can always be applied or abided by "there is an exception to every rule" is a rule. Here comes the mind boggler: If it is indeed a rule, then there must exist exceptions to it as well, that is to say that there are exceptions to "there are exceptions to every rule." How can this be? An exception to this rule would be a rule without an exception. This means that there must exist rules without exceptions. This, however, is contradictory to the original rule "there is an exception to every rule," yet simultaneously it fulfills it because there must exist an exception to THAT original rule, meaning a rule with no exceptions. An interesting paradox to consider, exceptions to every rule means that sometimes there aren't exceptions, both confirming and opposing the original rule. It is a conundrum, an unending circle; a three dimensional thought, in a two dimensional world. Ω
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment