Thursday, February 26, 2015

Deduction & Inference

Most people take logic to be objective; but it is not necessarily so.

Logic is just another way of thinking. Logic is the basis for the advancement of science in recent times for humans.

Much of logic, as we know it, is called deduction.

Deduction means that you look at reality, the real world and examine what it is. Deduction tries to discover things as they are. To look hard at what is in front of our noses and what what it is. It is not what you imagine it to be. This is what it is, exactly like this.

Logic and science have a difficult birth in this current civilisation of ours. It was strongly opposed by the religious establishments that ruled the world at the time.

Religions are of great service to manking. Religions bring men and women to the spiritual side of life on earth.


But religious establishments, when they ruled the world, were political establishments. They laid down the rules and laws of how ordinary people should behave in their ordinary lives in order to be religiously correct, and hence politically correct.

All religions are founded on good common human values. Religions exist to make people humble, especially when their circumstances are capricious, when people cannot be trusted anymore. We act as nobodies, humble, unobtrusive, undamaging to others.

The problem with religious establishments is that they stagnant. They go back to the distant past to look for the source of the truth. From that truth, they try to identify the implications.

Inference is from the general to the particular.

Religious doctrines are inferred from perceived religious truth.

The danger of inference is that if the basic proposition is incorrect, then all the derivatives are false. There is a need to check on the basic proposition all the time.

There is inference in science. Once deduction has conclusion on a general proposition, that general proposition is then used as a basis for inference.

Some religious doctrines do get re-examined and revised. Some don't and they stick to what they want to believe.

In a lot of ways, political establishments work similarly to religious establishments. Political parties that constantly revaluate their missions will find themselves better align to the majority of the people. Political parties that rely on old ideas for longevity are fighting an uphill task trying to convince the majority of the people that their arcane ideas are still good.

There is that new trend from the business management gurus who say everybody, not just businesses, must have their visions and missions. This is jolly well and good if you are pursing your own personal jihad or crusade. But personal visions and missions may be at odds with the aspirations of society, especially when one thinks that one has the solution to all problems, and that is to eliminate others who stand in the way of one's vision.

The elimination of obstacles, rather than going round them, seems increasingly to be the way forward.

There is no more resourcefulness; there is now force.

The rise of militancy is now a global problem, caused by the expansion of the military complex supported by the printing of money. Weapons are now being exchanged for oil. Those with money and weapons now pursue higher level of goals, and that is spiritual fulfillment. They try to dominate others.

It is a fact generally accepted in economics that work makes people disciplined and circumspect and encourages respect for others who they have to trade with. Financial independence create arrogance, of people, of nations.

The overplay of the power of politics and religions is a dangerous thing for ordinary people. There is no mercy for people on the other side.

There is a need for discussion and consultation, which take longer time, but it will produce great benefit of understanding of each other, or how other people think and feel, and how we can all live together peacefully. These are simple truths, as fundamental as any religious truth, and which forms the basis of a tolerable life on earth.

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Good in depth article reflects the broad understanding and knowledge of the issues. I must also add that it has qualities associated with sound thinking. But it does not answer the question that we face today.

Ahmad Tajuddin said...

Great contemplation! I would say the current overwhelming of fanaticism and conservatism (on religious and narrow political ideology) are affected by misunderstanding on the epistemology of that particular religion/ideology itself. I still believe some religions, especially, are still compatible with the current complex affairs, however, we always need be ready to re-visit, re-examine the fundamentals.

walla said...

All the major religions have two components. One comprises common moral principles. The other comprises historical anecdotes delivered as divined exhortations.

Since we can't go back in time to assay the latter, we are therefore left with only the former.

Which leaves one to wonder why the world has not established a subject called moral mechanics, namely the process of developing morals based on the common principles only.

Maybe it's because there are so few timeless principles in the first place that believers are inclined to associate their faith more with the second component than the first.

Thereby missing the forest for the trees.

Likewise, politics gets religious when it is just a device to ensure good comes to society so that people can progress materially and also develop values to enhance their own inner management sans unnecessary conflict with others.

http://is.gd/hiH0q9
http://is.gd/5AEMmE
http://is.gd/VVS2O6
http://is.gd/SF4NZk
http://is.gd/mNEowo
http://is.gd/L2xuYx
http://is.gd/8tX1mK
http://is.gd/vxaWVC
http://is.gd/QyFhen
http://is.gd/igQHkO
http://is.gd/7xWdry
http://is.gd/hUEA9g
http://is.gd/UDlwj4