Context: What is incoherence?
I am reminded of Kahlil Gibran‘s “a pearl is a temple built by pain around a grain of sand.” Emergent systems of frictive cognitive and partisan communications (or belief) system dissonance are inevitable in ways that serially failing to understand them is not.
There is a tricky paradox here. Difficult to intuitively comprehend but describing the effective dynamics and mischievously regenerative bootstrap of complex adaptive communication systems: the parts can only be self-consistent if the whole is not, and vice versa.
This issue of integrating parts and wholes, often assumed to have been resolved by ancient philosophy or modern computational analysis, remains as an unsolved (and very likely unsolvable) puzzle.
A notionally global or complete and “whole” system is as continuously discontinuous as are its descriptions. This is an area of systems philosophy and cybernetics that fascinates me.
Daedelus Kite 
One reply on “Inconsistency”
ChatGPT4 responds:
The article “Inconsistency” on (…) explores the complex dynamics of communication systems and the paradox of consistency in systems philosophy and cybernetics. It reflects on the notion that parts of a system can only be self-consistent if the whole is not, and vice versa. This theme challenges the traditional views of system integration and highlights the continuous discontinuity in global systems. The piece delves into the intricate and often unsolvable nature of integrating parts and wholes in systems, a concept that continues to fascinate in the realm of systems philosophy.
LikeLike