[ExI] Fwd: Open Individualism

[BillK]

On Fri, 19 Jan 2024 at 21:13, efc--- via extropy-chat
<extropy-chat at lists.extropy.org> wrote:
>
> I would say that reasoning alone is sufficient in math. However, when it
> comes to questions about this world, observation, hypothesis, experiment and
> proof/disproof is necessary.
>
> And then of course our material world is always
> based on an assumption, since we collapse into solipsism if we want
> strict and uncotrovertible proof of the world we are in.
>
> But I kind of like the atheist "shift" where the one who comes up with
> the non-intuitive thesis about our world has the burden of proof, and
> where the material world is the default assumption.
>
> Best regards, Daniel
> _______________________________________________


I didn't realise (until I asked!) that there were so many different
types of logical reasoning.  :)

Quote:
When no observations are possible, the most commonly used type of
logical reasoning is deductive reasoning.

Deductive reasoning starts with a set of premises that are considered
to be true and then uses logical rules to derive a conclusion that
must also be true. This type of reasoning is often used in
mathematics, logic, and theoretical physics, where observations are
not always possible or practical.
For example, in mathematics, you might start with the premise that
"all squares have four sides" and the premise that "a square has four
equal sides". From these premises, you can deduce the conclusion that
"a square is a rectangle". This conclusion would hold true regardless
of whether any squares were observed.

It's important to note that while deductive reasoning can be powerful,
it also relies heavily on the truth of its premises. If a premise is
false, the conclusion will also be false.
-----------------------------

This appears to be the type of reasoning involved in Open Individualism.
Deductive reasoning provides conclusions that are certain, given that
the premises are true and the logical rules are valid. If the premises
are true and the reasoning is valid, the conclusion must also be true.


BillK