Philosophy → Watching the Split · Aside
The creeds
Every claim in this section that cannot be checked, labelled as what it is.
I am against anything held sacred and untestable, and that includes my own untestables. So every claim in this section that cannot be checked is listed here and labelled as what it is: a creed, a stance I choose to live by, not a conclusion I have demonstrated. Wherever one of them appears, its label links back to this page.
What counts as a creed here
A claim is a creed when nothing in experience could ever show it wrong. That does not make it worthless; it makes it a choice. Any strand that says "this part cannot be checked, only honoured" is a strand turning sacred, and it is flagged.
Mathematics has the precise version of this: the axiom of choice. Some foundations really are chosen, and the system is consistent either way. A labelled creed is a chosen foundation, stated as chosen.
1. “It is unsolvable, and that is good”
The creed
The hard problem is unsolvable, and that is good, because the open loop keeps the unfolding going.
Why it is a creed: it is unfalsifiable by construction. I state it as a chosen stance to live by, not a demonstrated truth. It is the inversion I hold most loosely. Used in Two inversions and Solve or observe.
2. “Naming the dropped dimension would collapse it”
The creed
Folding drops dimensions the full thing has, but naming the dropped dimension would create the very duality that takes you down.
The critique, kept beside it: "I could name it, but naming breaks it" is indistinguishable from "I cannot name it". That is the mystic's wall, not the mathematician's move; Gödel and Cantor named their escapes exactly. I do not resolve this tension in the theory's favour. The reader judges. → The crux, in full
3. Horn A, with folding as the answer to combination
The creed
There is no line between felt and unfelt: self-reference is always felt, even dimly, and the unified "I" is the folded form of the many.
Why it is held as a stance: panpsychism is a real and respectable position, but it owes the combination problem, and folding-as-combination has not paid that bill. It stays visible.
And one bet
Not a creed, a bet
That the rhyming limits (halting, Gödel, P versus NP, the hard problem) have infinitely many manifestations. Four is not infinity; a proof would need a generator. I treat "infinite" as a bet, tested by never running out. → The rhyme