Posts Tagged ‘meaning’

“Language, Mathematics, and the Price of Artificial Intelligence”

August 19, 2025

*

Ricardo Morín
(Triangulation Series)
Musica Universalis
Silk quilt streched over linen
37″ x 60″
2013-18

A geometrical construction of a dodecahedron within a Fibonacci composition, reinforced by a right-angle triangle: A meditation on the harmony of the universe, where mathematics and language converge yet never fully enclose reality.

Ricardo Morin, August 20, 2025

Abstract

This essay examines the interdependence of language and mathematics as the twin pillars of knowledge, each indispensable yet incomplete without the other. While mathematics secures precision and abstraction, language renders reasoning intelligible and shareable; together they approximate, but never fully capture, a reality richer than any formulation. The discussion situates artificial intelligence as a vivid case study of this condition. Marketed at premium cost yet marked by deficiencies in coherence, AI dramatizes what happens when mathematical power is privileged over linguistic rigor. Far from replacing human thought, such systems test our capacity to impose meaning, resist vagueness, and refine ideas. By weaving philosophical reflection with contemporary critique, the essay argues that both mathematics and language must be continually cultivated if knowledge is to progress. Their partnership does not close the gap between comprehension and reality; it keeps it open, ensuring that truth remains an unending pursuit.

Language, Mathematics, and the Price of Artificial Intelligence

Every society advances by refining its tools of thought. Two stand above all others: mathematics, which distills patterns with precision, and language, which gives form and meaning to reasoning. Neither is sufficient alone. To privilege one at the expense of the other is to weaken the very architecture of knowledge.

Artificial intelligence dramatizes both their promise and their limitations. The announcement of a $200 monthly fee for access to ChatGPT-5 is revealing. Marketed as a luxury service “for those who can afford it,” it underscores the widening gap between technological privilege and cultural necessity. Those with resources can fine-tune their productivity; those without are left behind. Yet even for the well-equipped, the question persists: what exactly is being purchased?

The machine dazzles with speed and scale, but its deficiencies are equally striking. Engineers may be virtuosos of algorithms, but grammar is not their instrument. The results are too often colloquial, vague, or lacking in rigor. To extract coherence, the user must not be a passive consumer but an editor—capable of clarifying, restructuring, and imposing meaning. The paradox is unmistakable: the tool marketed as liberation demands from its operator the very discipline it cannot supply.

This paradox reflects the larger truth about knowledge itself. Mathematics and language are both indispensable and both incomplete. Mathematics achieves abstraction but leaves its results inert unless language renders them intelligible and shareable. Language conveys thought but falters without the rigor that mathematics provides. What one secures, the other interprets.

Yet both are bound by a deeper condition: reality exceeds every formulation. Our theories—whether mathematical models or linguistic descriptions—are approximations shaped by the observer. Language cannot exhaust meaning; mathematics cannot capture finality. Knowledge is never absolute: it is a negotiation with a reality richer than any model or phrase.

Artificial intelligence lays bare this condition. It can automate structure but cannot provide wisdom; it can reproduce language but cannot guarantee meaning. Its true value lies not in replacing the thinker but in testing our capacity to resist vagueness, impose coherence, and refine thought. What is marketed as freedom may, in truth, demand greater vigilance.

To dismiss language and the humanities as secondary, or to imagine mathematics and computation as sufficient unto themselves, is to misunderstand their interdependence. These disciplines are not rivals but partners, each refining the other. AI magnifies both their strengths and their deficiencies; they remind us that progress depends on the continual refinement of both—mathematics to model reality, language to preserve its meaning.

The path of knowledge remains open-ended. Language and mathematics do not close the gap between our finite comprehension and the inexhaustible richness of reality; they keep it open. They allow us to approach truth without presuming to possess it. Artificial intelligence, as every tool of thought, shows us not the end of knowledge but its unending condition: a dialogue between what can be measured, what can be spoken, and what forever exceeds us.

*

Annotated Bibliography

  • Arendt, Hannah: The Life of the Mind. Vol. 1: Thinking. New York: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1971. (Arendt examines the act of thinking and the limits of expression, which shows how thought requires language to become shareable while never able to exhaust reality. Her work reinforces the essay’s claim that reasoning without expression cannot advance knowledge.)
  • Bender, Emily M., and Koller, Alexander: “Climbing towards NLU: On Meaning, Form, and Understanding in the Age of Data.” Proceedings of ACL, 2020. (Bender and Koller argue that large language models process form without true understanding; this highlights the gulf between mathematical pattern recognition and linguistic meaning—it supports the essay’s caution that AI dazzles with form but falters in coherence.)
  • Chomsky, Noam: Language and Mind. 3rd ed. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2006. (Chomsky explores the innate structures of language and their role in shaping cognition; this affirms that language conditions the possibility of thought while it still remains limited in capturing reality.)
  • Devlin, Keith: Introduction to Mathematical Thinking. Stanford: Keith Devlin, 2012. (Devlin explains how mathematical reasoning distills structure and pattern while acknowledging abstraction as approximation; this reinforces the idea that mathematics, as a safeguard of precision, cannot exhaust the world it models.)
  • Floridi, Luciano: The Fourth Revolution: How the Infosphere Is Reshaping Human Reality. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014. (Floridi situates digital technologies and AI within a broader history of self-understanding, which enriches the essay’s argument that mathematics and language—extended into computation—remain approximations of a reality beyond full control.)
  • Lakoff, George, and Núñez, Rafael: Where Mathematics Comes From: How the Embodied Mind Brings Mathematics into Being. New York: Basic Books, 2000. (Lakoff and Núñez argue that mathematics arises from metaphor and embodied cognition, which reveals how dependence on human interpretation and the affirmation that mathematical theories, as linguistic ones, remain bound to the observer.)
  • Mitchell, Melanie: Artificial Intelligence: A Guide for Thinking Humans. New York: Farrar, Straus and Giroux, 2019. (Mitchell provides a critical overview of AI’s capabilities and limits; it shows how the advancement of pattern recognition does not close fundamental gaps in understanding and parallels the essay’s critique of AI’s grammatical poverty.)
  • Polanyi, Michael: Personal Knowledge: Towards a Post-Critical Philosophy. Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 1962. (Polanyi emphasizes tacit knowledge and the need for articulation in validation; it echoes the view that mathematics and language refine understanding but never achieve closure.)
  • Snow, C. P.: The Two Cultures. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1993 [1959]. (Snow diagnoses the divide between sciences and humanities; this undergirds the essay’s call to treat language and mathematics as complementary pillars of understanding.)

Tags:, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »

“The Delusion of Authority: …

July 21, 2025

… Power, Storytelling, and the Fear of Losing Significance“

By Ricardo Morin, July 2025

Ricardo Morin
The Stilobato of Zeus Underwater
CGI
2003

Abstract

This essay examines the human mind’s compulsion to invent stories—not merely to understand reality, but to replace it. It explores how narrative becomes a refuge from the void, a form of self-authorship that seeks both meaning and control. The tension between rational observation and imaginative projection is not a flaw in human reason, but a clue to our instability: we invent to matter, to belong, and to assert that we are more than we fear we might be. At its core, this is a reflection on the seductive authority of story—the way it offers not just identity but grandeur, not just comfort but a fragile illusion of power. Beneath every myth may lie the terror of nothingness—and the quiet hope that imagination might rescue us from the fear of a diminished understanding of our own importance.

.

The Delusion of Authority: Power, Storytelling, and the Fear of Losing Significance

We tell stories to make sense of life. That much seems obvious. But if we look a little deeper, we may find that the stories we tell—about ourselves, our beliefs, our traditions, even our suffering—aren’t just about sense-making. They’re about power. Not always power over others, but something more private and often more dangerous: the power to feel central, secure, and superior in a world that rarely offers those guarantees.

This need shows up in ways that often appear noble: tradition, loyalty, virtue, cultural pride, spiritual clarity. But beneath many of these lies a hunger to be more than we are. To matter more than we fear we do. To fix the feeling that we are not quite enough on our own.

We don’t like to think of this as a thirst for power. It sounds selfish. But in its quieter form, it’s not selfishness—it’s survival. It’s the need to look in the mirror and see someone real. To look at the world and feel part of a story that means something. And when we don’t feel that, we make one up.

Sometimes it takes the shape of tradition: the rituals, the mottos, the flags. These things give us the illusion that we are part of something lasting, something sacred. But often, what they really do is offer us borrowed certainty. We repeat what others have repeated before us, and in that repetition we feel safe. We mistake performance for truth. This is how belonging becomes obedience—and how ritual becomes a mask that hides the absence of real thought.

Sometimes it takes the shape of insight. We adopt the language of spiritual clarity or mystical knowing. We speak in riddles, or listen to those who do. But often, this too is about authority: the idea that we can bypass doubt and land in a place of higher understanding. When we hear phrases such as “listen with all your being,” or “intellectual understanding isn’t real understanding,” we are being invited to give up reason in exchange for what feels like truth. But the feeling of truth is not the same as the hard work of clarity.

And sometimes, this hunger for centrality shows up in identity. We claim pain, pride, or history as a kind of moral capital. We say “my people” as if that phrase explains everything. And maybe sometimes it does. But when identity becomes a shield against criticism or a weapon against others, it stops being about belonging and starts being about authority—about who gets to speak, who gets to be right, who gets to be seen.

Even reason itself is not immune. We use logic, not only to understand, but to protect ourselves from uncertainty. We argue not only to clarify, but also to win. And slowly, without noticing, we turn the pursuit of truth into a performance of control.

All of this is understandable. The world is confusing. The self is fragile. And deep down, most of us are terrified of being insignificant. We fear being one more nameless voice in the crowd. One more moment in time. One more life that ends and disappears.

So we reach for authority. If we can’t control life, maybe we can control meaning. If we can’t escape time, maybe we can tell a story that lasts. But this, too, is a delusion—one that leads to suffering, to isolation, and to conflict.

Because when everyone is the center of their own story, when every group insists on its own truth, when every insight claims to stand above question—no one listens. No one changes. And no one grows.

But what if we gave up the need to be right, to be central, to be superior?

What if we didn’t need to be grand in order to be real?

What if we could tell stories not to control reality, but to share it?

That would require something more difficult than intelligence. It would require humility. The willingness to be small. To be uncertain. To live without authority and still live meaningfully.

This isn’t easy. Everything in us pushes against it. But perhaps this is the only path that leads us out of performance and into presence. Out of delusion and into clarity. Not the clarity of slogans or doctrine, but the clarity of attention—of seeing without needing to rule over what is seen.

We don’t need to be gods. We don’t need to be heroes. We just need to be human—and to stop pretending that being human isn’t already enough.

*

Annotated Bibliography

  • Arendt, Hannah: The Origins of Totalitarianism. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World, 1951. (A foundational study on how ideological certainty and group identity can undermine thought, clearing the way for emotional conformity and mass control.)
  • Beard, Mary: Twelve Caesars: Images of Power from the Ancient World to the Modern. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 2021. (Explores how images and stories of rulers are crafted to sustain the illusion of divine or inherited authority.)
  • Frankl, Viktor E.: Man’s Search for Meaning. Boston: Beacon Press, 2006. (Reflects on the will to meaning as a basic human drive, particularly under extreme suffering, showing how narrative can sustain dignity and life.)
  • Kermode, Frank: The Sense of an Ending: Studies in the Theory of Fiction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 1967. (Examines how people impose beginnings, middles, and ends on chaotic experience, seeking structure through storytelling.)
  • Nietzsche, Friedrich: On the Genealogy of Morality. Translated by Carol Diethe. Edited by Keith Ansell-Pearson. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2007. (Argues that moral systems often arise from resentment and masked power struggles rather than pure virtue or reason.)
  • Oakeshott, Michael: Rationalism in Politics and Other Essays. Indianapolis: Liberty Fund, 1991. (Critiques the rationalist impulse to systematize human life, warning against overconfidence in reason’s ability to master reality.)
  • Todorov, Tzvetan: Facing the Extreme: Moral Life in the Concentration Camps. Translated by Arthur Denner and Abigail Pollack. New York: Metropolitan Books, 1996. (Offers insight into how identity and morality hold—or collapse—under conditions that strip away illusion, highlighting the limits of narrative.)
  • Wallace, David Foster: This Is Water: Some Thoughts, Delivered on a Significant Occasion, about Living a Compassionate Life. New York: Little, Brown, 2009. (A short meditation on how default thinking shapes our perception and how awareness—not authority—offers a path to freedom.)

Tags:, , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Uncategorized | Leave a Comment »