• : Function split() is deprecated in /home/ukrzis/public_html/sites/all/modules/i18n/i18nstrings/i18nstrings.module on line 711.
  • : Function split() is deprecated in /home/ukrzis/public_html/sites/all/modules/i18n/i18nstrings/i18nstrings.module on line 711.
  • : Function split() is deprecated in /home/ukrzis/public_html/sites/all/modules/i18n/i18nstrings/i18nstrings.module on line 711.
  • : Function split() is deprecated in /home/ukrzis/public_html/sites/all/modules/i18n/i18nstrings/i18nstrings.module on line 711.

How many times I had heard this phrase…

And also “the categoricalness is the attribute of the narrow-mindedness”…or something like that.  And it has always made me protest (even if this phrase wasn’t appealing to me)

And after I became the mathematician…I got acquainted with the theory of the fuzzy numbers and the fuzzy set. With the optimization methods…and there can be really the correct (probable) answers like “the task solution is between the 3, 348 and 3, 349” or “the variable within the range from 2 to 3 meets the conditions of the task”.


But that is Maths… the second way to solve the task by usual people is like “I don’t care of the accuracy so obtained answer will be ok”.


And the first answer is “we don’t know the exact answer as the power of the PC isn’t enough to count more accurate while we are not going to sit 4 days to obtain the 4th mark after the point”.

But that is Maths. Not a science but the language to describe the task. And by the way the mathematicians rarely use the subjects as the teachers demanded more precise and accurate answers.

And what is in life?

But the subject in life is when the kid aged 3 declares he knows that the wind is blowing   because the branches of the trees are weaving! I.e. when the person tells something he doesn’t know well.

What if I am not a kid and I know the subject perfectly? Every time some kind of “a good person” comes and looks haughtily telling me “don’t be so categorical“.


And when speaking about esoteric, energetic, world laws, psychology…every fool considers his phrase-subject is the top of the human wisdom.



That is only a story teller introduction and the fairy tale will follow



Whether the categoricalness a bad or a good thing?

Guys, the fuzzy set is the mathematics abstraction and it is very hard to meet it in the real life.

The world is defined . And if you know something very well there is no place for the non categoricalness. 

Let us imagine a “wise man” creating the subject challenging my phrase "2х2=4"....writing the entire three copybooks of formulas and having anything as taking two and two apples will be four apples without any other options.

The rule is the same in the energetic, esoteric, psychology… 

Another case is that he can count the apples (as a rule all the interlocutors finished their first year of the secondary school) but he can’t watch the energies.  Either he can’t make that or lazy to learn but he wants to make the impression bluffing and after the subject comes out.

And every smarty of that kind is being irritated by the categoricalness…IMHO because he doesn’t know the simplest thing: if you are the specialist you will not twist round and give some space instead of the answer where the answer can be (or can’t be). You are just giving the answer. And he is irritated not by the categoricalness but by the fact somebody knows more than he does.

But maybe he knows less? Maybe he is irritated by the self-confidence of the incompetent amateur? 

Heh…if the kid claims me authoritatively that 2х2 is 5 I will not give him this subject phrase. When having free time I will take the apples out and show him that 2 apples plus 2 more apples will be 4 apples anyway. But if there is no free time I will just tell him he is mistaken and advice to read the Maths textbook to check.

But no! In the esoteric field almost everybody is an expert. Not in the esoteric as a trend but in the opinion of what books are the correct ones!

No one esoteric disputant will ever say in reality he is a specialist but he exactly knows which books are the correct ones and which are the garbage.

Such a paradox…which let to brush away with indignation any of the printed information sources the disputant doesn’t like. 

And instead of question analysis to skip onto the persons analysis by whom that question was arisen (or the qualities of the book’s author). 


So “you are the fool yourself” is the most favorite argument in any discussion and that fact makes me feel irritated.

And slowly but smoothly I came up to the simple idea:

"Don’t be so judgmental” is the socially acceptable form of the argument “you are the fool yourself ” with all the consequences, i.e. it can be applied when the person doesn’t have any arguments but he wants to prove someone he is wrong…


And what about “the categoricalness is the attribute of the narrow-mindedness”? Are these definitions also the same?


So I think this phrase is the right one!


And the person is limited. He limited himself with the only possible option and he brushed away all other options.  Maybe he brushed away the incorrect ones (if the person is the specialist) maybe not…but he became the specific, accurate, he stopped spreading on and that certainly limited his understanding of the question.


And even if he wasn’t right he fixed himself in a definite position, he had defined.  Therefore it is easier for him to make the next step when having the sure footing under his feet.


Of course if he is stupid he will not make the next step. But if he is smart why not?


As the categoricalness isn’t the  equivalent to the definition "indolence".




I had always told: “now I have decided this way but if the new data appear I can change the decision or opinion (but maybe I can’t change it)” but let it be this way right now.


So I am judgmental and I wish you the same.