Archive | 11:22 pm

Where Logic Fails

24 Mar

Okay, so the point came up “Where exactly does Logic fall short of providing good answers?”

Fair enough. I made a statement I’m asked to support it. I will do so with a simple example.

Six family members are headed out of town for a weekend of fun on the beach when someone announces “The coffee pot is still on. It never got shut off.”

Now in some families this would be no big deal. The driver might simply turn around and head back home. Or someone, hopefully not the driver, would take out their cell phone and call a trusted friend or family to go in and turn the offending coffee pot off. Or they might decide to hell with it, let the old place burn to the ground, we have insurance.

For some families the exact opposite happens. I knew one where this situation would launch them all into a full fledged screaming match for an hour or more determining which one was the incompetent idiot who was to blame.

If it were decided the person who made the coffee in the first place should have turned it off then everyone would make a point in the future of trying to get someone else to make the coffee. If it were decided that the last one out the door were the one to blame then everyone would make a point in the future to make sure someone else would be the first one out the door — Never themself.

A logical persons approach to this situation would be to first discard all non-logical arguments. Then they would canvass for, or even suggest solutions. But the minute they started canvassing for solutions, or even suggesting solutions, they would no longer be operating on a strictly logical basis. They have now entered into the creative process.

A Map Thinker™ would go straight to the heart of the situation.

This is where we are.

Then they would ask “How did we get here?”

We got here because everyone got sidetracked and ran out the door without thinking about the coffee pot. While one or more people may have been better positioned to remember the coffee pot than some of the others the fact is they all forgot to turn off the pot.

To refuse to shoulder their own part in the problem, and to attempt to blame one single person for the situation is both illogical and Mapologically unsound. This refusal to accept any portion of the blame is something certain people do all the time — And it does not matter what type of reasoning you use the chances are it is a waste of your time and theirs trying to show them where they went wrong.

The next question is the future.

How likely is it this could happen again in the future?

Probably good.

How do you keep people from getting excited and sidetracked during while heading out the door for a weekend vacation? When all they want to think about is what they are going to do on the beach.

One way to prevent it happening again would be to assign one person to coffee-pot-final-check-before-going-out-the-door duty.

But that person could be sick,

or doing something else,

or simply forget again.

So the best way to solve the potential future problem is to develop a final checklist everyone goes over before heading out the door on vacation.

So a Map Thinker™ would not even concern themself with whether or not any given argument was valid or not valid or logical or illogical.

They would go straight to the creative process by looking at the past that got them into the mess.  Looking at the potential future and estimating each possible result. Then attempting to come up with a way to alter the outcome.

While it is quite possible for a person using Logic to arrive at the same solution I prefer the Map Solution Method™.

It is interesting to me that when deciding where to go for dinner or vacation logical people will suggest that you write all the pros in one column of a piece of paper and all the cons on the other so you can weigh their respective merits.

In other words a person who claims to solve problems using Logic has just told you to draw up a map and evaluate it.

Which is exactly what any Map Thinker™ would do.

Yet one more thing Logic cannot find a solution for is excellently presented by metonymy4u in “The Critique of Free Reason”. I’m sure there is a better way to link to their site than what I just did but I’m new to this.

Hopefully this link will work: http://metonymy4u.com/2013/03/24/the-critique-of-free-reason/

Can Map Thinking™ present a solution?

Yes. Map Thinking™ insists that the thinker use the simple technique of estimating the results of any solution and then choosing that which produces the desired result.

What result do you choose?

© 2013 All rights reserved.

Advertisements

Map Thinking™ Vs. Logic

24 Mar

What is the difference between Map Thinking™ and Logic?

This little essay will help you build a map of the difference.

Logic seeks Truth .

Map Thinking™ seeks to understand relationships.

Logic concentrates on words and definitions of words in order to narrow the argument and keep to the subject.

Map Thinking™ concentrates on the linguistic implications of words in order to broaden the subject to where comprehension is achieved.

Logic is designed to produce answers.

Map Thinking™ is designed to produce questions.

A Logical Thinker places the greatest value on the answer that produces the greatest truth.

A Map Thinker™ places the greatest value on the usefulness or potential usefulness of concept, whether it be question, answer, or hypothesis.

Logic follows in the footsteps of Aristotle, Plato, and DesCartes. Logicians look for Answers.

Map Thinking™ follows in the footsteps of Socrates. Mapticians™ look for The 2 Q’s: Questions and Quests™

Let us take a minute out for a Map Legend™ — Or, if you will, a discussion of terms.

Map Thinking™ is what a Maptician™ does.

Mapology™ is the study of Map Thinking™.

A Mapologist™ is one who studies Mapology™.

The 2 Q’s: Questions and Quests™ may need a little more explanation.

In school we are taught that questions have answers. Those answers are written in the back of the book. He who has the “Right Answer” is the smartest in class and “Gets and A+”. This is Logical.

A Maptician™ like a good scientist, or a(n) historian, or a mathematician, considers questions that have easily findable answers to be simple, if not boring, questions. If you can find the answer using Google, Yahoo, or DuckDuckgo, the answer may be useful, but it is not really interesting.

A truly interesting Question starts a Quest.

People often believe that Einstein answered a lot of questions that Newton did not address.

He didn’t.

What he did was set up a theory that set of a plethora, or spate if you will, of questions that needed to be answered.

In other words he asked a HUGE question about the nature of the universe “What if we were wrong and this Theory of Relativity is right?”. Look how well, and differently Reality would fit together.

This question set scientists off on an enormous and difficult quest to prove or disprove his assertions.

Like many a gamer, Einstein asked the Question that started the Quest that, once solved, allowed Science to level up.

And move on to the next great question: Can Quantum Physics and The Theory of Relativity co-exist in the same universe?

Now that we have an insert, a legend, that gives us a general Map of The 2 Q’s™ let us get back to the main Map, or essay, if you wish. The difference between Logic and Mapology™.

Logicians only admit of one possible view. A Logician only recognizes that argument that is objectively, provably, unarguably, true. Once this truth is established no other Point of View is allowed.

Mapticians™ look at every possible Point of View of which they are aware. This helps them to achieve understanding of the relationships involved. They then attempt to determine, by search or by guess, what the effect of each POV might be. They eliminate those which are destructive to their goal. They eliminate those that are useless. They sort through those that are left and choose the one, one’s, or combination, that suit the Maptician’s™ purpose.

The Maptician™ philosophically accepts the scientific principle that the observer, by their very existence, effects whatever is being observed.

This is not a new idea.

A philosopher named Epictetus who died only 135 years after Christ worte, “People are not disturbed by things, but by the view they take of things.”

People like Eckhart Tolle and Maxwell Maltz take this simple observation and create self help systems based on the concept, “You can control your life, your happiness, etc, by taking control of how you view events in your life.”

And they are right.

But a Maptician™ takes this observation and carries it a step further.

A Maptician™ realizes that in order to fully understand any event they must also understand the POV’s of those who both observe and are effected by the event.

This is often best achieved by looking at the stories of those involved.

Logic isolates an event or a thought and deals only with what has been isolated.

Mapology™ insists that what came before, and what happened or is likely to happen after, is just as important to understanding the event as the event itself.

Plato believed we only see the shadows of real things.

A Maptician™ does not see things or their shadows. A Maptician™ sees the interrelationships between things and the intrarelationships of things.

Thus logically either a rose is a rose or it is not a rose. If it is a rose then it is either a red rose or it is not a red rose. If we move to Bertrand Russell style Logic then either a thing belongs to the class of things we call roses or it belongs to another class of things we call something else.

A Maptician™ sees the interrelationship of the rose to the soil and the sunlight and the bee. Further the Maptician™ recognizes the differing points of view of the bee, the gardener, and the dog peeing on the rosebush.

The Maptician™ further sees the intrarelationships that cause the rose to extract nutrients from the soil and sunlight, and allows it to produce red flowers and green leaves.

And while the Maptician™ recognizes that the rose has features that distinguish it in the human mind from other plants it still has many more things in common with other plants than it has things that differ.

This pretty much lines up the differences between Logic and Mapology™.

(c) 2013 all rights reserved.

ultimatemindsettoday

A great WordPress.com site

Don Charisma

because anything is possible with Charisma

War By Other Means

Politics & Philosophy

this is... The Neighborhood

the Story within the Story

stillness of heart

MUSINGS : CRITICISM : HISTORY : PASSION

The Guilty Preacher Man

abandoned illustrations

matchtall

A tall women amazon model WordPress.com sit

Gotta Find a Home

Conversations with Street People

Three Wise Guys

Best not to think about it

Mister G Kids

A daily comic about real stuff little kids say in school. By Matt Gajdoš

Ray Ferrer - Emotion on Canvas

** OFFICIAL Site of Artist Ray Ferrer **

The Judy-Jodie and Kelli Memorial Blog

A great WordPress.com site

A Financial Life Coach

Your Financial Life Coach

Storyshucker

A blog full of humorous and poignant observations.

Dysfunctional Literacy

Reading from a writer's perspective... and vice versa!

Top 10 of Anything and Everything

Animals, Gift Ideas, Travel, Books, Recycling Ideas and Many, Many More

ajrogersphilosophy

A fine WordPress.com site

Thoughts

What ever I'm thinking