AFTERWORD

 

This book is based on a method that may provide a more coherent interpretation than the existing ones, but it cannot offer certainty. There are some intrinsic limitations that allow any text to approach the truth only asymptotically. These limitations can be grouped into four categories:

a) The limits of the subject (an author) refer to a finite mental capacity, time and information available to an individual (so some details may be missed or mistaken).

b) The limits of the medium (a language) refer to the fact that no existing language is fully adequate to express the multi-dimensional nature of reality.

c) The limits of the object (facts) refer to the imperfection of the factual knowledge. For example, not taking into account presently accepted facts that may turn out to be mistaken in the future would end up in the current incompleteness, but taking them into account would lead to a future incongruence (when they are corrected).

d) The limits of the background. Any text is created at a particular time, in a particular place and within a particular mentality. Therefore, it is inevitably affected, at least to some extent, by its locality, which may not fully resonate with a different time, space, or mentality.

This does not mean that the epistemological value of the materials can be relativised (in a post-modern fashion). To what extent they approximate the truth should be judged on the basis of to what extent they comply with the criteria described in the first part. It is unlikely that new ways of knowledge acquisition will be discovered, and any reduction to one or some of them cannot be superior to their synthesis (the problem with the existing ideological frameworks, including the materialistic ones, is not so much in what they are saying, but in what they are denying). The above limitations, however, do indicate that no interpretation can be perfect and universal. Moreover, if any interpretation is allowed to solidify and turn into an ideology, it becomes reactionary. Therefore the Synthesis should be taken as a dynamic process that can continue to be refined. There will always be some space for further improvements, the only conditions being that the stated criteria are followed or their change is justified. Therefore,  this should not be considered the end, but the beginning.