How do Logic Puzzles and ABC's Tie it all together? We use science as a tool to substantiate our beliefs. For example, an artist may have full control of the color wheel but until the prism comes along to indisputably substantiate what "the eye of the beholder" sees as beauty, it is just another work of art. The legal profession touts the moniker "innocent until proven guilty" but in reality the phrase should be "guilty if able to be corroborated with science" because the system has been refined so that no one who operates outside of it will receive a just end.
So let's continue with the math and philosophy lessons, shall we?
We assumed
A+B=C
and
B-D=F
therefore
A+F must equal A+(B-D) or A+B-D
However we know (by definition) this is equivalent to C-D
So to restate the relationship,
A+F=C-D
Now take a philosophical perspective:
A causes B but C exists independently!
Do you understand what this means? For one situation it was shown that A and C were on opposite sides of the equivalency fence. But they are not related. This means that for other situations it is just as likely that A and C could exist on the same side of the equivalency fence, with or without the presence of other variables.
How then are we to proceed? Agree to a process:
1. Define the variables.
A=
B=
C=
D=
E=
F=
2. Identify known interactions.
A causes B
A and C are independent
3. Draw conclusions
Consider an imaginary example:
Is there a God?
Can all things be understood?
Will the purpose of existence be heightened or reduced by our behavior?
Does injustice hurt?
Does God hear our prayers for justice if we can't prove that God exists and what would be the possible ramifications of denying compassion?
No comments:
Post a Comment