It’s all viewpoints. Can’t go wrong with perspective and contextual thinking, I believe.
I’ve noticed, for every theory that’s “got it all” on paper, there’s a problem: It’s a theory. it’s on paper. It tells a story. It sounds great! It may even solve a few problems.
But then you’re walking down the street and suddenly you’re caught up in an unexpected scenario. You’re whisked away, the paper with all the beautiful proofs is sitting happily on your desk and you’re responding by your wits alone.
What then? Which system works? At that point, you draw from every resource at your disposal from wherever it may come and no singular system, however many values it may have, seems to cover all bases.
So, yes, I’m a fan of n-valued logic as far as logic systems go. I’ve come across _so many beautiful_ theories.. and then the flaws come out like dragons.
Example: Paradoxes. They’re a consequence of limitations of the logic system used. For example, lots of money is spent on new and better encryption methods. It’s a good thing.
But let’s say I’m a criminal facing the hardest encryption and I *just can’t break* this password. What do I do? Do I set 100 computers on it for 1000 years?
Nope. I track the guy whose password I want, kidnap someone he cares about until he gives up the password. All the marvelous encryption and all of the high security goes *poof* in that moment.
Just something to keep in mind during your investigations. It’s easy to get lost in the head with a beautiful theory and I’ve spent many hours studying things as you do.
Sorry for the rant – it’s not directed at you or your investigations.