To my knowledge, categorical deductions were invented as a
method of coherent knowledge as recently as 2013. I, Nathan
Coppedge, was the inventor. It is an offshoot of an earlier project
called The Unity Project that adopted an analogical format and
also the characteristic Cartesianism. That two-part aspect is
perhaps the most unique part of the method, although its
implications are actually much more broad and important, as it
provides a basis for true objectivity

Purpose: Categorical deductions are designed to yield
objective knowledge on a wide variety of subjects.

How it works: Opposites are assumed to be exclusive of
all territory between them. Opposites oppose along the
diagonal, for example, in quadratics A opposes C, not B
or D. B opposes D, not C or A.

It may be though of as exponentially efficient, since four
categories produces only two deductions.

The deductions are AB:CD and AD:CB strictly for quadra.



1. Ugliness opposes beauty. Stoicism opposes sensitivity.

Deduction 1
      "An ugly stoic is beauty-sensitive."

Deduction 2
      "A beautiful stoic is ugly sensitively."

2. Paradox opposes non-paradox. Wealth opposes poverty.

Deduction 1
 "Wealth is problematic, then poverty is non-problematic."

Deduction 2
 "Wealth is non-problematic, then poverty is problematic."

Many other (sometimes less obvious) deductions are possible,
which are correct so long as we assume that opposites contradict
and that we are not being naive realists, so the only combinations
do not involve '1 : 1' or direct contradiction, and as such they
cannot be contradictory or thoroughly unhelpful:

3. Subjectivity opposes objectivity. Determination opposes

Deduction 1
"Subjective determination objectifies the will."

Deduction 2
"Subjective will objects to (objective) determinism."

4. Here we will ASSUME religion opposes science, and reality
opposes fiction.

Deduction 1
"Religious fiction is scientific realism."

Deduction 2
"Religious realism is science fiction."

These examples give the barest hint of just how truthful the
method is.

Categorical deductions can also be made with longer individual
category terms involving multiple words, with the assumption that
the exclusion concerns the coherent
relevance of category A. If a
different category is seen as primary, a different context may
result. However, since the opposite of category A is
pre-determined, and it doesn't matter whether B or D is
compared first, then there is no effect on the system by the
arbitrary choice.

Further explanations of some of the details may be found on

There is also some similarity to the methods of Paroxysm
(solution to all paradoxes, which operates in sets of neighboring
categories compared to their opposites) and AOLT-THERE
(which instead involves selecting a term AND an opposite
each category-square