In Post Philosophy: Taking Back Logic, Michael Aaron Cody asserts that logic precedes motion and enables adaptive survival through coherent deviation, while motion without logic results in chaos. He rejects mathematics as the origin of existence or intelligence, framing it as a static record of dynamic processes rather than a causal force. Cody critiques IQ as an inadequate measure of intelligence, advocating instead for "Survival IQ," which emphasizes recursive adaptability over symbolic fluency. He argues that logic is not the domain of institutions but an inherent capacity for adaptive reasoning. Static systems, like educational, ethical, or biological, fail without continuous evolution. Cody redefines evolution as recursive compression of directional motion, not random mutation, and views time as a descriptor of change rather than a driver, and says that ethics, cognition, and survival must be structured around recursion, not rigid doctrine.

Post Philosophy by Michael Aaron Cody delivers a striking and intellectually agile argument dismantling traditional ideas, executed with a mix of precision and a bit of flair. He does a great job of presenting formulas, equations, and the ideas that bind them in thoughtful and lucid, often rhythmic prose. This is not light reading, and it is not meant to be, but even still, Cody avoids the customary academic pretension without diminishing the complicated philosophical territory of his work. I appreciate the use of real-life examples and analogies, from collapsing empires to corporate fossils, and how he frames his arguments in a practical dimension to what could otherwise be an abstract discussion. As a result, Cody backs his arguments up with case studies, empirical data, and references. Overall, this is an excellent study for readers interested in thinking beyond traditional boundaries, with Cody offering a rewarding and disciplined mental exercise. Very highly recommended.

Post-Philosophy: Taking Back Logic by Michael Aaron Cody is an innovative work that challenges conventional ideas about logic, intelligence, and philosophical authority. Instead of reiterating classical or academic arguments, Cody creates a new framework centered on conceptual and structural motion as the basis of meaningful thought. The author suggests that traditional systems like mathematics, IQ measurement, and static philosophy are remnants of deeper, recursive processes that have been misinterpreted as origins. Cody advocates for a shift toward dynamic thinking that evolves through contradiction rather than adhering to static symbols of coherence. Throughout the chapters, the book dismantles dominant narratives: it critiques the supremacy of IQ as a measure of intelligence, questions the idea of time as a fundamental axis, and urges a rethinking of evolution, ethics, and even artificial general intelligence (AGI) through the lens of recursive motion. A recurring concept—Δm—symbolizes directional deviation that retains structure, representing the type of motion Cody sees as essential for survival and coherence in a collapsing world. He consistently introduces terms like “Compression Compass,” “Recursive Survivability,” and “Purpose-Guided Recursion” to argue for a flexible intelligence that learns through collapse, not despite it.

The prose is intense and symbolic, mirroring both philosophical treatises and poetic manifestos. It encourages readers to transcend inherited knowledge systems and nurture an internal logic that does not depend on credentialism or external validation. Michael Aaron Cody’s work does not seek to emulate academic neutrality; rather, it addresses those disillusioned by conventional metrics of intelligence and control, presenting an alternative rooted in structural clarity and adaptive survival. This is not a traditional philosophy book but rather a structural blueprint for navigating uncertainty and resisting cognitive stagnation. For readers willing to rethink how logic functions, not as a detached framework but as a living, recursive engine, Post-Philosophy offers a compelling look at traditional philosophical constructs, advocating for a dynamic understanding of logic. It is a challenging read, but well worth exploring Cody’s arguments.