The Value of a system..

I previously commented on the value of Topology, or more specifically, the lack of value in a system so myopic. I can't help but feel like I started a war of sorts between geometry and topology. I found myself defending geometry, or at least its relevance, while it was systematically challenged by the class discussion. In this war, I noticed an interesting relationship between these two factions: you can't dis one without using it. It was like Delanda's class where he kept using Ratified Generalities in order to show how worthless ratified generalities were. Was I taking crazy pills in class or did I stumble upon an insight: geometry and topology are complimentary, or rather, one surely supports the other in a tower of knowledge. If we remove geometry, topology collapses.

Topology will not get us anywhere without geometry. That bottle flying through the air follows a perfect arch, also created when you squash a circle. If you remove that arch, you are left with relationships. Relationships have no meaning without corresponding subjects.

Is anybody else picking up on this quasi-meaningless battle that I just invented?

If I could address Universality: To me, the study of anything universal is in the psychology realm. Freud, Jung perhaps can teach us something, but does architecture
or even mathematics belong there? I would say no. We bought mathematical universals in "Contact" with Jodie Foster, and left it there. Does a certain part of the brain correspond to feelings, sure. Can you condition a monkey to use a computer, why not? But does red, white, and blue make one feel patriotic? Do buildings with the Golden Section calm one's senses? If you dig a hole, dig another hole next to it, then put them together, do you get two holes? No. Not here, and certainly not everywhere.

Do we have any psychology majors out there? I wouldn't imagine we do, under my personal stereotypes. They search for commonalities, truths, universals. I happen to be an Anthropology major where we almost inherently search for differences. We find and place value in plurality, human interactions, in relationships.. And here I circle back again. This may not be as clear to you as it is to me, but perhaps topology is the study of intricacies that are too human (for lack of better term) to be universal. What if psychology is to geometry what anthropology is to topology? I don't care that you salivate when you smell beef. I am absolutely fascinated over avuncular disparities in Mongolian nomads (anyone want to read my dissertation?) To be sure, Peter may flick his nose at a circle or square and yet spend weeks infatuating over mugs and donuts. So maybe we don't have to dismiss geometry or even assign values to anything. Maybe we can agree that it is simply more interesting to step past universals and into something more contingent, more organic, more ...?

Am I taking crazy pills?