What happens if you skip out on investigating the first presumption of Inquiry and proceed with the Inquiry?
The word ‘Model’ is etymologically related to the Sanskrit Māyā, from the root Ma: To Build’. And less directly to ‘Man’ [Manushya] and ‘Mind’ [Manas].
A ‘Model’ is a ‘Double’, a construct deep in the belly of ‘Two-ness’ [‘Double: from the Latin: Duo: two; Plus: extended; multiplied].
A toy-car is a model. So is a doll’s-house. A ‘Model’ is a creation, a re-construction of the original, a re-presentation, not the Real McCoy.
But the most important models are mental-models, the ones we build inside our heads using things that ‘double’.
Sign and symbol that refer and come alive in such building blocks as the Alphabet and the Number System. All mediums in fact conducive to referential traffic.
An understanding mounted on assumptions, extended in corresponding beliefs, then conceptualized in binary structures [True: False; Up: Down] and expressed in the vocabulary of signs and symbols, typically language and logic, is called a ‘Model’.
Model begins in assumption. So what is my first assumption? That there is such a thing as a ‘Me’ with such things called ‘assumptions’ stuffed inside my head, sort of like socks in a drawer.
Watch out. To elaborate breezily on Model as an ‘Interpretation’ and equate a Modeled-Reality to an ‘Interpreted Reality’ is to miss the point. The notion of ‘Interpretation’ is itself a modeled-idea, as is the very notion of ‘Model’. Fresh Academics and Deconstructionists are the most susceptible to this take.
Importantly, there is nothing ‘Wrong’ with Model. ‘Right and Wrong’ themselves are divisions made in the context of Model.
Not-Two 
You must be logged in to post a comment.