Thank you for the book recommendation and search term, I will check it out, luckily Springer books are available for students.

Your comment seems to be for me perfect on topic. I am actually comming from a practical issue, when ever we have a look at a certain topic (could be anything from religion, business, sport, biology, diet) a school of thought explain it is A, another says it is B... and so on, the question is now how to deal with the different opinions? It is impossible not to have worldview or some sort of mental map for what is happening in your life. So when there are contradictions and you dont want to be disintegrated you need a common map, I think. For example if you are a strict Christian and at the same time a physicist scientist, if you dont close your eyes, then there are some sort of inconsistencies in your map (and if not then we just assume it now for the exmple).

Maybe my word choice was a mistake, I try to prevent that by thinking that there should be many ways possible to deal with the ocean.


Your answer makes me think especially sentence no.2 will be something I have to consider.


Another inconsitency in my thinking, I realize your objection now too... thank you for the concrete literature recommendation. Since Hegel is notoriously hard to understand and 200 years old, are you familar with a more current thinker that has synthetized this approach further and in a more "understandable" way - or is Mr. Hegel still the way to go?

Thank you for your post, do you have a concrete literature recommendation like a specfic title or author?

meta — khaled

Thank you for your answer, you were right my assumption that there would be only 1 meta-meta theory is not justfied and I realize that now too. My thoughts were that when position A says X=1, position B says "No" X must be =0, and position C says X=3, then the next level theory should have the power to say X=0,1,3 and thus integrate all the lower theories. (I use numbers here as example for complex theories that may contradict each other but still make sense in themselves) ...but that there could be more such theories I wasnt aware off, which then would need another meta*3 theory...

Do you have a reading recommendation about uncertainity?