So many wanna bees [sic] actually believe that philosophy is based on the ability to memorize and spew out gibberish. That is because, they cannot grasp the simple, i.e., if you cannot grasp the simple and obvious, all you can do is pretend to do something complex with it.
The foundation of grammar is what we can name. As Plato pointed out, all we can name are relatives and correlatives, so, if you want to study names, the best place to start is with geometry. Let your own hand teach you what you can and cannot name, and your ability with geometry, show you how much you can actually comprehend. If you cannot predict the future of a simple line segment, and the relatives and correlatives involved with simple Algebra or Common Grammar, take meds if you come to believe you can predict the complexities of social behavior or the cosmology of the Universe. The world is simply full of wanna bees and before you know it, you are stung until brain dead.
These two elements of a thing, Aristotle tried to formalize into Logic, and he failed. He was one of those Plato mention who, get lost by multiplying names, lost in their own synonym, however, Aristotle is important because he does tell you what can be done, he just failed of knowing what to do with it.
If we can comprehend Grammar systems in terms of a relative and correlative, the symbol set being either relative or correlative, i.e. simple or complex, and then our method of using those symbols to effect binary recursion with our method of constructing symbols, we end up with two squared result, Common Grammar, Arithmetic, Algebra and Geometry. One might notice, something which escapes the Theory Mongers, that we must first have a simple system of grammar before we smoke a joint or pop pills and go off into demonstrating our inability to not being able to use them in accordance with simple binary recursion.
These four Grammars do not name specific grammars, but grammar groups which comply with a chosen system of naming and manipulation, however as they are all method's of utilizing binary recursion, they cannot possibly contradict themselves or simple binary recursion, these products are simply the fault of the inability of the user to employ them, as Confucius noted, in accordance with the truth of our original definition of a thing. A definition, is as Plato noted, simply how we combine the names, and name that grouping. i.e., binary recursion.
So if you find yourself mentally incapable of doing this simple process, without having a fit, a mental meld-down, which produces pages and pages of gibberish, get medical attention, attention which a particular social group cannot help you with, or should even endure.
The path to learning how to think has never been hidden. You will find the use of Geometry to learn how to think in two distinct metaphors of even the Bible, the Mark on the head, is taught to you by how you use your own hand, and line upon line, precept upon precept, So, if you fault Plato because you could not understand him, how can you imagine that you can fault something even smarter than Plato, the author or author's behind the JCS?
So, if your own hand cannot teach you, if you refuse to even study what you can actually do, and what you can actually comprehend of the results, just say, I do not wanna know and be done with it. Others will tell you to just shut the phuck up, or shut the phuck up and do it and learn.
Your first teacher in life, is your own hand. If it cannot teach you, fault yourself, not your environment.
PS, I might also mention, as far as metaphor goes, Geometry is also implied by the four who measure the Temple, and who wonder the earth, or Grammar Matrix, so, do not look for these as pookas to be seen, they are a sign of intelligence, which can only be seen in the result of your own behavior. The temple, by which you can and cannot be in the image of God, or the intelligible, is, as noted within, you as mind. In the simple, if you are not capable, you are not capable of comprehending the Universe, in psychological terms, you are schizophrenic, the intelligible is not commensurate with the perceptible. If you cannot be true to yourself, i.e. your mind with your own hand, then you are not mentally competent. So, no, neither your or I created the concept of a Grammar Matrix, even Jesus warned you that a sapient species must be born twice, once perceptibly, the matrix of your mother, the other through the matrix of grammar systems, the intelligible.