Rationality Reason
From SenseThinkAct
REASON
An annotated list of 15 common sources of reasoning error followed by a four exercises as examples of ways in which they may be put to work.
thinking error 1 DEFINITION If we are to reason using everyday language we must be clear about exactly what the words we are using refer to. Everyone attaches slightly different meanings to the words they use depending on their particular experience.
This is not so much of a problem with concrete noun concepts, but is commonly a source of confusion with more abstract concepts. As ideas become more abstract the connection to our experienced knowledge becomes more distant. Words like 'freedom' and 'democracy' are worthless unless brought to earth by tangible definition. How many people are tortured? How is the media controlled?
Other descriptive words require qualification if they are not to be too vague. Words like progressive, beautiful, bad or nice.
thinking error 2 AMBIGUITY Referring only to a 'dark brown table' can be worthless if the object is being offered for sale. Does brown indicate mahogany or thick paint covering shoddy construction? This shows an ambiguity caused by using a word that is not precise enough for the context.
In other cases and especially in English we find a single word that has two quite different meanings. These meanings can even be contradictory as in 'to go fast' or 'to stand fast'.
In this type of example definition is provided by the context. Other cases of ambiguity may be more subtle and these are more likely to cause errors in argument. If a word is causing confusion it is best to restate the problem in different words.
thinking error 3 INCORRECT BASIC IDEAS It is useful to think of this on two levels. That of our assumptions and that of our basic propositions in a particular piece of thinking.
- A. Assumptions - These are the unproven intuitions, beliefs and so-called instincts that underlie our thought structure as a whole. Most people are not aware of the assumptions upon which they act - assumptions are usually tied up with our feelings and early experiences and inherited cultural norms.
- Philosophers have identified fundamental assumptions that we all share such as the consistency of the universe and the principle of induction.
- Brilliant thinking on unchecked assumptions can lead to disasters. (Thinking particularly about some of the highly paid people who act as governmental advisors).
- B. Basic propositions - Any rational thought process starts from certain basic propositions and from these we may deduce an outcome. This outcome will vary from a definite conclusion to more questions. To make this process clear we must first articulate our basic propositions in full. Then we should check they are factually correct, or to what extent they are supported. Are the supportive references reliable? On what authority are they based? What interests might the authority be acting on behalf of?
- We must work back from any opinion to find the propositions on which it is based. We check these and sort out the factual, from the emotional, from the intuitive. Are the facts reliable?
- What real conditions are behind the emotional feeling? Express the part that is intuitively judged/evaluated as clearly as possible.
- This process is invaluable in any area in which you are working or otherwise involved. It allows you to become articulate and clear and will make any subsequent programme of action much more effective.
thinking error 4 CAUSE OR ANTECEDENT Sometimes cause is separated from effect by considerable space or time. The connection between the two may not be obvious. In such cases another factor that is closer in space or time may appear to be the cause. e.g. In prehistoric times, and in come cultures more recently, the causal connection between intercourse and childbearing was not realised. Sometimes causal connections are implied in speech: "After I had taken the medicine my pain went way". But we cannot be certain that the chemical properties of the medicine were the cause of the pain ending.
The point is that the cause is not always the most obvious factor. Apparent causes need to be investigated until actual concrete relations are ascertained.
thinking error 5 REAL ATTRIBUTE OR ASSOCIATION? It is important to be clear about the real 'characteristics' of an object or event as distinct from its associations.
I recently read a statistical report from Scotland which lamented the lack of truth in the stereo~ype of the tight-fisted or thrifty Scot. Statistics showed the Scots to be squandering their income at a rate that caused concern in the author of the report.
Stereotypes are bad enough simply because they generalise about a people who are in fact all different. They are even more absurd when it is likely that the steroetype is false.
Unwarranted associations that appear as real characteristics are most pernicious. Working class people are said to be dirty and thick. Although put like this, it is patently absurd this conditioning, in many guises, plays an important part in class division.
Sometimes we are interested in the associations of an object or event rather than its real characteristics. It is the associations of a Star of David medalion that are important not its physical characteristics. The same is true of most ritual.
thinking error 6 SPURIOUS GENERALISATION Sweeping generalisations are one of the most common weaknesses of everyday reasoning.
Incorrect generalisations are usually made on the basis of inadequate evidence. Observation of a few cases, however vivid, do not mean the rest of the category are similar. e.g. On entering a port of a country you have never before visited you may 'get an impression of the country'. You may see many cars for instance. Then on another trip you travel further inland and find a completely different scene with very few cars.
Other generalisations are misleading in that they do not give any idea of the number of exceptions to be expected. Generalisations that ar not all-encompassing should be qualified.
Test for Spurious Generalisation
- a. Were there enough observations made? (From different viewpoints in sufficient locations).
- b. Are the instances recorded representative?
- c. Were they recorded objectively?
- d. Was a thorough search for exceptions made?
Note: It is possible to make the opposite mistake - assuming one case when there are more than one. Thinking you are the only person feeling so-and-so whereas there are usually many others feeling the same but not communicating about it. (Common in areas of taboo e.g. men talking to each other about their emotional life)
thinking error 7 CLASSIFICATION Classification systems will attempt to make a 'universal' division of the world but this is never possible from one place in space and time. Particular classification systems always show some things more clearly than others. Essentially classification is a gross simplification of the world in which individual things are likely to share a range of similarities with other things. But classification is useful because it is orderly allowing us to find things, and because it helps us understand underlying structure and pattern.
Some classifications become more real than the world they are dealing with. Classification is only ever an temporary artificial for us to understand the world not a grid through which we must live.
When we look for something in, for example, a library index, we must remember we are looking through a classification grid made by another fallable human with a specific viewpoint and set of interests. A disadvantage of classification can be seen on the most basic level in the verbal classifications of polar opposites. Good/bad, working class/middle class, normal/abnormal, sane/mad, clever/stupid. These polarities simplify a reality that is spread out on a perhaps multi-dimensional continuum and not divided into two opposed categories.
The most complete and flexible classification system is of course language. And yet language itself will reflect the bias of those who are most culturally dominant. So published English will, in the main, reflect a male, middle class, middle aged, white, able-bodied view of the world.
thinking error 8 EMOTION There is a very strong tendency to formalise one's early emotional experience in later conscious philisophical beliefs or idealogy.
We will try to use reason to create a plausible explanation for our (basically irrational) feelings. This is a most important point because it is such an insidious and profound process. I.e. it is difficult to be aware of such sub-conscious steering. Our whole life will have been arranged in accordance with out emotional requirements so our vested interest in this 'not being challenged' is high.
In smaller ways emotion plays a great part in confusing rational thought process. We may cooly use emotive terms, 'my country, right or wrong' to move people emotionally. We may also be dramaticaly emotional 'I'd like to kill you' etc.
Learning to differentiate between feelings and rational thought and responding to each separately in an appropriate way, is one of the most useful things we can do to think more clearly in the place most people get bogged down (see emotion). Rational thought will almost certainly bring us up against our emotions and those of others. A change of ideas in some circumstances may mean losing friends and a secure job or discarding a lifetimes work. Unless we know how to deal with our feelings separately, we will find only the easy options are open to us in life and we will probably 'rationalise' our choices rather than admit our fears and face realities.
A common emotional block is 'fear of failure'. We are conditioned to success being the only acceptable outcome and to err or fail is equated with humiliation, and yet trial and error is a necessary part of the learning process. Only if we overcome our fear of failure can we move into new ground.
thinking error 9 PERSONAL EXPERIENCE Personal experience is very influential compared with second-hand knowledge (e.g. from books). It is perhaps not surprising that we give knowledge gained by direct experience a status of 'Law'.
Personal experience is the most vivid and rich form of knowledge. At the same time it must be accepted as unreliable whilst unsubstantiated from other sources. Perceptual errors of magnitude and recognition are common. (link senses section). Generalisation on the basis of too small a sample is the usual error made on the basis of personal experience.
Personal experience is of great value but should be checked against 'third party' sources. On the other hand a knowledge gained from books and other media is greatly enriched by personal investigation.
thinking error 10 VALUE AND OPINION We must be clear how our values are formed. There is the judgement based on 'objective' evidences, measurements etc. and then there is the intuitive evaluation. This latter may be based on less certain evidences and references, personal experience, association and emotional bonds. If we are arrogant with our opinions we must be sure our values are formed from reliable sources.
The best way to check opinions based on experience is by extensive sharing with your peer group. Hearing many other people express a similar feeling can turn what seemed like personal idiosyncrasy or neurosis into a political demand.
Of course group opinions may be held in error. e.g. a few hundred years ago everybody believed the world was flat. But if a lot of people share a strong feellng or opinion you can be sure there is a real social condition behind it even if the conclusion held is incorrect. E.g. the appeal of racism to provide a scapegoat diverts thinking from other genuine grievances that require recognition like white working class oppression.
thinking error 11 CONTEXT It is well accepted now that many 'personal problems' that people suffer have larger social causes. By examining the person we may discover little. It is only by looking at a wider context that we discover the cause of the problem.
Ecology has demonstrated particularly well the interrelation of small events with the larger world. If a problem cannot be solved as it presents itself, perhaps you have not fully appreciated the implications of its context.
Getting this overview may not be more difficult than reading a carefully chosen book, taking a walk or listening to someone with inside information for an hour or two.
thinking error 12 VIEWPOINT In thinking about complex phenomena viewpoint is most important. The more viewpoints from which we study phenomena the more aspects will be revealed.
When stuck thinking about a 'problem' taking another viewpoint is always a good move.
Disagreement is often caused by differences in the viewpoint which may make the same source of information appear radically different. It is important to start any debate by stating your point of view with as much detail and passion as possible and then to listen to other points of view.
Then if it seems useful develop bridging ideas.
A single viewpoint is inevitably limited.
thinking error 13 THE PURITY OF SCIENCE An absurdity is built into our society through the artificial division of people into manual and intellectual and then later of the so-called intellectual field into arts or sciences.
These divisions are artificial and should not be treated as if they represent real differences. A car mechanic will go through a perfect model of rational analysis when finding a mechanical fault in a vehicle. In fact a good machanic must have as logical a mind as a scientist. The practical confims the abstact and the intuition and imagination complement reason and 'scientific' logic.
Rationality is not healthy when it is raised up as an isolated ability. Its co-existence with intuition, imagination and action must be accepted.
thinking error 14 FALSE VALIDITY
FALLACY: Any argument which decieves us, by seeming to prove what it does not really prove.
LOGIC: Rules underlying arguments which, when followed, Will ensure that only true conclusions are drawn from true premises.
- a. A logically valid argument is used to imply the truth of one
of its premises. "The validity of a syllogism is quite independent of the truth of its premises. 'I have sent for you my dear ducks,' said the worthy Mrs Bond, 'to enquire with what sauce you would like to be eaten?'
- 'But we don't want to be killed.' cried the Ducks.
- 'You are wandering from the point.' was Mrs Bonds perfectly
logical reply.
- Lewis Carroll preface to third edition Euclid and His Modern Rivals
- b. True premises are used to suggest a false conclusion. e.g. I saw it in the newspaper. All newspapers tell lies. Conclusion (false) It was a lie. True conclusion; It might be a lie.
- Some ties are not artistic. I admire anything artistic. Conclusion (false) There are some ties I do not admire.
- If A is C and B is C, then it is a false conclusion that A = B. A and B share the same characteristic but are equal only in that respect.
- c. Conclusions that are self-evidently true can suggest a valid argument. e.g. No thieves are honest. Some dishonest people are found out. Conclusion (false) Some thieves are found out. Although it happens to be true that some thieves are found out, it cannot be deduced from the stated premises.
- d. False Causality: If B follows A then A is often taken as the cause of B. If you go to Harley Street for a cure and afterwards get better this may suggest, but does not prove, that your recovery was due to the specialist's ministration.
- e. Irrelevant Application: Validly drawn conclusions are often then reapplied to material which is not part of the origional premises. The reaction of guinea pigs to different coloured light is used to imply that there is a similar human response.
- f. False Induction: By giving a plethora of substantive detail and avoiding the mention of contradictory instances. e.g. attacks on Western medicine will instance all the times it goes wrong without providing the same space to mention its considerable successes.
thinking error 15 ANALOGY An analogy is used to describe (or explain) something unknown by reference to something known that has similar characteristics.
"Presumptive reasoning is based on the assumption that if things have some similar attributes their other attributes will be similar" Shorter Oxford Dictionary.
Analogies tend to run away with themselves. They become interesting in themselves as poetry or imagery and begin to imply much more than their circumscribed purpose. This is commonly noted in religions where helpful analogies tend to become blind articles of faith.
The limits of any analogy should be made clear. If we learn that atoms are 'like billiard balls' it should be made clear exactly in what ways they are to be imaged as 'like billiard balls'.
The temptation to overuse a rich analogy should be avoided. There tends to he a confusing transference of properties between analogy and subject. As analogies develop always check with reality that all attributes compared are equivalent and there is no implication of further equivalences.
The perfect analogy is: the ratio 2:4 is equivalent to 50: X therefore ,'. X = 100
But expressed loosely as 2 is to 4 as 50 is to X - we can derive the result X = 52.
If we know a dog has a liver we might infer that a cat also has a liver; because they are similar animals. This is a useful hypothesis but not a truth until we check with reality by dissecting a dead cat.
Analogy is a powerful mode because of the minds propensity to match up similar patterns.
'Below are four exercises suggesting formal uses of the checklist above':
Other visits could be made to parliament and to the local debating society.
1. Select problem. Express it clearly. Then write out several different descriptions of the problem from different viewpoints. Put it in a wider context (note all solutions that arise).
2. When problem is clearly understood scan memory for all previous experiences in similar and related matters (note any solutions that arise).
3. Rest. Treat yourself to a day outing (note any solutions that arise - in passing).
4. Brainstorm solutions. If stuck ask yourself "What might the answer look like?"
5. List solutions so far. Make shortlist. Evaluate. If a few solutions stand out as equally possible list points for and against - cross out reasons that offset each other. Discuss pros and cons separately. Giving time to think through each side of a contradiction. Ask yourself, "What is the implication of this idea?" Enter into each solution imaginatively as if it is already fulfilled. Rest. Later review process and make decision.
6. If still no adequate solutions go to 'expert' advice.
7. Test solution in practice.
Bombard tne area of interest with questions, questions, questions . . .
- HOW? the manner in which, operation, process, measure...
- WHY? reasons, motivation, purpose...
- WHERE? spatial, geographical, direction, context...
- WHICH? definitions, names, specification, connections...
- WHOSE? personalities, ownership, benefit...
- WHAT? is to be done, nature of it, name, classify...
When subject is complex... separate underlying structure from illustration, decoration, detail. Perhaps sub-dividing structure and asking questions of each part.
Arrange answers in groups. Arrange groups in sequence.
We usually have a purpose that directs the course of our questioning. This purpose gives us insight into the key questions that require answers at all cost. However asking all questions opens the subject up presenting fresh and unimagined possibilities.
When you have instilled this idea in your whole being turn to the work at hand - forgetting the exercise...
- Where do we come from?
- Why is there famine and war on earth?
- How can I grasp the infinity of space and time?
- To what purpose am I here on earth?
Answers to such questions are often awesomely inconclusive or have implications that bring us up against disturbing feelings of powerlessness. Adults aware of this and wishing to avoid discomfort, will often give children facile nonsense in answer.
One of the most useful and exciting of the fundamental questions is to examine the value of human life, of our own life. It is only possible to do this and see the implications clearly if we can deal with the feelings that inevitably arise. If we do not, the feelings will cause the shut down of our thinking before many of the implications even come into our consciousness.
Difficult as this path appears it is the direction in which human evolution lies and is the highest application of human mental endevour.
- What use are the main actions in your life?
- To what end or purpose are they designed ?
- Is this 'end or purpose' a desirable component of a further end?
Follow the chain along which such questions lead you until we come to that which has value of its own o.ccount. Are your actions useful to some end that you truly value?
Buy the most expensive hard bound excercise book that you can afford. On the first pages write down all the assumptions that you hold that you are presently aware of. If it is difficult to start to identify your assumptions answer some of the following questions to start you off.
- What assumption do you do you have to make to believe the definition of a word in a dictionary?
- What assumptions do you make when the lights fail in your car?
- What assumptions do you make when you believe todays news headlines?
- What assumptions do you make when you see a black woman driving a Rolls Royce ?
- What assumptions do you make when you meet white men in isolated jungle?
- What assumptions do you make when you see a parson slapping their child?
- What assumptions do you make when you cast your vote in the General Election?
- What assumptions do you make when you see a man pushing a pram?
- What assumptions do you make each time you telephone someone?
- What assumption do you make when you read about St George slaying the dragon?
Subject each assumption that you write in your book to intense scrutiny. Are there further assumptions upon which this assumption is based ?
Review your list of assumptions every six months. How has the last year or so changed your values or viewpoint? Add to or amend your list as appropriate. Check the mutual consistency of your assumptions. Do some contradict each other? If so why?
Having worked through initial embarassements it is possible to focus in various ways;
- 1. Choose a challenging rather than mundane topic. Don't spend time recycling old worries. Develop your thoughts about this topic over several sessions.
- 2. Choose a different topic each session.
- 4. Leave it completely free to include spontaneous stories, fantasy, images and flashes of insight.
Talk for half an hour - playback for half an hour. To start each session blurt out anything about the topic that comes into your head. Then assess what you really think.
It may help to imagine that you are addressing an enraptured or infinitely and benign audience for whom you can do no wrong.
Mark tapes worth keeping to playback at a later date. Thinking aloud forces the mind to reveal its rational processes. By recording our thinking we can become more aware of our rationality and this will also improve self confidence.
1. Doubt everthing until you find the reason for not doubting it.
2. Believe nothing which you cannot see quite clearly: and distinctly to be true.
3. The only thing that is absolutely certain is your own existence (ie sensation) Expressed in the famous "I think therefor I am."
If you go far enough asking questions about the truth and validity about any piece of knowledge you will come to a level on which doubt exists.
When I was doing my 'A' level "Physics it took a prolonged interrogation over many weeks before the teacher admitted that he really had no idea in any absolute sense, what matter or energy, or more specifically electricity, was. That science only provided a relative rather than absolute answer to questions of essence.
- 1. Make a list of things you have your doubts about. What are these doubts? Can you put words to them? Are they justified by any evidence you can find?
- 2. Make a list of things you feel certain about and things that you have never doubted? Think about these things and find the area where some doubt at least exists. Search out this Achilles heel of doubt?
A doubting frame of mind slows us down makes us think more, investigate, be sceptical, ask questions Doubt brings up alternatives, generates ideas and is creative. On the other hand feeling right allows us to act immediately, generates action, descisiveness, growth and gets results... but may be rigid.
Both attitudes are useful at different times. Can you switch? The criteria is that any thinking should be effective in a particular situation. Righteousness does not allow space for broad considerations of effectiveness. On the other hand chronic doubt makes it difficult to act.
1. OVERVIEW: This is an initial survey at speed. Using a pointer scan through everything but the main text. Look at the contents page, pictures, back cover or dust cover notes, summaries, conclusions, graphics, margin notes, italics, bold type, capitals, subheadings, quotes, tables, dates, statistics, graphs, footnotes etc. Be especially careful to use the pointer around the outlines of diagrams, and other illustrations. Aim to understand the overall structure. Is it worth reading from cover to cover? No? Then are some parts worth reading in detail?
2. PREVIEW: Now read the beginnings and ends of each chapter and scan the rest of the prose. Aim to get the gist of the argument but leapfrog the difficult bits. Key word diagram notes may help if the structure is complex. You can now begin to select what is useful to study further, criticise the content and reject parts.
3. INVIEW: Reread what you have decided Will be useful. Reread the difficult bits but still don't get bogged down. If its not clear move on regardless. Few authors will not summarise key points clearly at some stage! Mark key text and obscure passages with a light soft pencil. Make your won index on the rear fly leaf.
4. REVIEW: Re-read key text and obscure passages. Scan to make key notes. For a heavy book or area of study make a large general diagram of the overall structure and sub-diagrams for each section/topic etc.
5. SECOND REVIEW: Read notes next day and then in one week and in a month. In the first review redraw the initial key word diagram - to clarify the pattern. The subsequent reviews can be quick - a matter of 5 minutes.
- Note. The above is not a rigid formula but can be varied to meet the needs of different material. If you can break the conditioning that books should be read 'properly' or not at all it can cut study time by at least 50 per cent. (ref Buzan)
1. The best way to improve is to practice ... but you will need to arrange to get feedback. A sympathetic but knowledgeable friend may give you criticism and encouragement in exchange for some other service. Otherwise its all down to an evening class - or the flexible interpretation of a text book.
2. Study authors noted for their clarity e.g. in English e.g. Samuel Butler, George Orwell, Adrienne Rich. Pat Barker. Notice particularly how their sentences are constructed - and how they are limited. Look at writing in your own dialect, ethnic patois or language. Use this in preference to Oxford English wherever possible.
3. Vocabulary. As you read always note words you don't know. Look them up in a dictionary. In the next few days use them in a bit of your own writing from your own imagination. The writing may be directed by the words themselves. Writing spontaneous pieces from random vocabulary increases the inter-connectivity of the brain. This means an increased level of creativity.)
- Avoid the use of cliches and overused words. Examine your writing and make a list of words that you use too often or vaguely. The next few times you write avoid using these words. Make a short collection of popular cliches from the local press.
- Before tackling a new subject it is worth glancing at a glossary. You won't then have to stop every few paragraphs to look up new terms.
- If you use dialect or colloquial terms that your audience may not understand, provide them with your own glossary. Be proud of the language that is yours, without hiding behind it.
4. Sentences. Keep sentences short. Use the full stop. Keep to 8 syllables per sentence in comics to 20 syllables per sentence in prose.
- Usually make just one assertion per sentence.
- See the sentence from the reader's point of view. Could it be read in a way that would make it ambiguous? Ask this question of each sentence until you correct any vague habits.
- For details of how to structure your writing to make the most impact. See the Eight criteria of retention (link).
- The 'sense' should run fluently from sentence to sentence. Again, try to see the writing from the point of view of someone reading it. Extra connecting sentences may need to be inserted. Sentences can begin with And or But.
- Paragraphs form natural units. Bundles of sentences.
- If a sentence depends on a comma, the sentence is better reorganised.
5. Organisation. Write an outline of your idea first, having organised your notes or other data. Check the ideas to see there is no confusion and you have sufficient information. The outline may be rewritten many times and data studied until you are quite sure about the clarity of your ideas. Decide on subheadings and even paragraph contents.. Although it is often a good idea to leave the outline open ended as ideas are generated in actually vlriting.
Depending on your skill, the subject matter and the soundness of your outline thinking, it may only be necessary to write one draft. It is common, however, to do two or three drafts. This is because the first draft will usually spark off ideas to evolve and refine your ideas. Especially when you come back to it after a few days or in discussion with a friend.
__________________________
- The Art of Becoming an Original Writer in Three Days!
- Here follows the practical prescription that I promised. Take a few sheets of paper and for 3 days in succession write down, without falsification of hypocrisy, everything that comes into your head. Write what you think of yourself, of your women, of the Turkish war, of Goethe, of the Font criminal case, of the Last Judgement, of those senior to you in authority - and when the 3 days are over you will be amazed at what novel and startling thoughts have welled up in you. That is the art of becoming an origidnal writer in three days. Ludwig Borne 1923
______________________________
