Thought, Logic and Reality

The sensory mechanisms of a human being are continually being bombarded with an infinite number of stimuli from the empirical world. Cognition of the stimuli is dependent upon three main factors: perception, conceptualization and symbolization.

Perception is limited by the finite range of operation of the human sensory mechanisms, that is, it operates within certain threshhold levels. Furthermore, stimuli that actually "catch our attention" may be unconsciously screened by our cultural background.

Conceptualization is defined here as a selective abstraction from what we have perceived of a phenomenon. It is a process whereby we seek to identify common properties of a class of phenomena. The abstraction itself can be done in an infinite number of ways. There is no correct way to conceptualize a phenomenon. A concept is a mental construct. It exists only in the human mind.

Symbolization is the process whereby we assign a symbolic label to the concept or mental construct. Common agreement on these labels lead to symbolic language(including words using the alphabet) and communication among human beings. There is no inherently correct way to assign a symbol. "Correctness " depends strictly on consistency in usage.

Each of the above-mentioned factors reflect some constraint or arbitrariness. Perception is limited by the finite range of operation of the human sensory mechanism and also cultural constraints. Conceptualization is limited by its selective nature, that is, it cannot focus on all aspects of a phenomenon that are perceived. Symbolization is an arbitrary process.

In view of the constraints and arbitrariness pointed out above, how can we ever know a phenomenon in its totality through thought which is based on symbolic language?

Non - A zone

------------------------------

A - zone

The above shows a diagrammatic model of Aristotle's law of the Excluded Middle, i.e. a thing is either A or non-A. It cannot be both at the same time. The line dividing the two zones, which themselves cover a theoretically infinite area, may be said to have zero width.

This model is a conceptual construct which causes a lot of problems when we attempt to apply it to the empirical world. It simply does not fit the empirical world. There are no sharp dividing boundaries in nature; one thing just merges into another. Some of these changes may take place in a short time and be obvious but others may take a much longer time, perhaps millions of years so by the time scale of our life span or even human history, they may seem fixed and static with clearly defined unchanging boundaries. However, Nature has all the time in the world to effect whatever changes there may be on her agenda.

We can never say with finality that this is where one thing ends and another begins. This is the basic problem with the cause-effect model. At which precise point or sharp dividing line does cause end and effect begin?

Splitting the dividing line of the Aristotelian model in two and moving each outwards in opposite directions gives the following diagrammatic model:

A---------------------------------------A

tendency to A

tendency to non-A

non-A--------------------------------------non-A

In this case, A and non-A are ideals that do not exist in the world of human experience. Thus, in the empirical world, there is no true A or non-A. We are always somewhere between the two extremes. It is much more realistic to view the empirical world in terms of a tendency or probability. We can never know something in its totality because of some of the factors pointed out earlier. Nuclear Physics research is based upon probability mainly because of the uncertainy stated in Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle.

Probability implies both A and non-A at the same time. If there is a 90% probability of the occurence of an event A, then it is 90%A and 10% non-A at the same time. Since the ends of the latter model are ideals that do not exist in real life, this model can be named the law of the Excluded Ends.

Thus, a thing is both A and non-A at the same time, that is, a thing possesses characteristics of both A and non-A at the same time although it may possess each characteristic in unequal amounts. A thing cannot be entirely A or entirely non-A. The real world is simply not like that.

Like this Article?

Do you like this Article? Why not let the Author know. Click the button to like the Article. And your like will be added. Likes are anonymous.

Share this Article

Feeling Creative?

Would YOU like to publish an article on Connecting Singles?

Would YOU like to publish an article on Connecting Singles? Are you an expert at something, have an interesting story, or a good lesson to teach... why not share with other members. If you have experience or expertise in a topic that will be of interest to CS members, you may submit an article to be published on the site.
Post your own Article »

Attention: Report Abuse. If this article is inappropriate please report abuse.
We use cookies to ensure that you have the best experience possible on our website. Read Our Privacy Policy Here