Deductive inductivity?

I guess that everyone was at least once thinking about how scientists formulate a theory or a statement based on the experiments they've carried out. Or maybe it's the other way round - they formulate a principle and then try to prove it right? Is their method inductive or deductive and what's actually the difference between those two?

Deductive reasoning is a basic form of valid reasoning. Deductive reasoning, or deduction, starts out with a general statement, or hypothesis, and examines the possibilities to reach a specific, logical conclusion. The scientific method uses deduction to test hypotheses and theories.

Inductive reasoning is the opposite of deductive reasoning. Inductive reasoning makes broad generalizations from specific observations. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false.  

Here is an example of deductive reasoning:

"All men are mortal. Harold is a man. Therefore, Harold is mortal." For deductive reasoning to be sound, the hypothesis must be correct. It is assumed that the premises, "All men are mortal" and "Harold is a man" are true. Therefore, the conclusion is logical and true.

Here is an example of inductive reasoning:

"Harold is a grandfather. Harold is bald. Therefore, all grandfathers are bald." The conclusion does not follow logically from the statements. Even if all of the premises are true in a statement, inductive reasoning allows for the conclusion to be false.

  

It's not hard to distinguish between deductive and inductive reasoning, especially if we have some funny examples! Deductive reasoning plays a role in testing hypotheses and theories and allows one to apply the theories to specific situations. Inductive reasoning has its place in the scientific method. Scientists use it to form hypotheses and theories.

Anger rules the world

Chris Taylor was an ordinary student. He believed in patriotism and wanted to serve his country in the noblest way he thought he could. He volunteered for the war in Vietnam considering it his patriotic duty. Soon after he arrived in the combat zone, he was told "You don't belong here". 

  

"Platoon" shows war from its dark side. In life-threatening situations we forget about our reason and make decisions based on emotions like fear, anger or sadness. In this film many scenes prove this statement right. Once Taylor finds a disabled young man and an elderly woman hiding in a spider hole. Taylor snaps, screaming and threatening the man, but is shocked to see Bunny (another soldier) bludgeon him to death. What made Bunny do that? Maybe it's normal to get rid of hard emotions in such way during the war? Accumulated fear and stress that soldiers have to deal with every day eventually found a vent. 

Not much later, Barnes interrogates the village chief to determine if they have been aiding the NVA. Despite the villagers' adamant denials and although Lerner also agrees that they are telling the truth, Barnes shoots and kills the chief's wife. Barnes then threatens to shoot the child of the woman, if the villagers do not reveal information.

The human life seems to be worthless in the film. Who's got power and no scruples can decide who'll stay alive. Emotions play the most important role and reason's been forgotten.

Hearty fighter's reasoning problems

The process of making decisions is very complex. We want to make the best possible decision and that's why we often hesitate during this process. But what makes us choose one thing instead of another? How helpful is here logical thinking? Is it helpful at all?

I had to deal with these questions and tried to find an answer. When do I decide to do something because I feel it's right and when do I listen to reason?

Decisions based on emotions are usually spontaneous caused by our reaction to something that just happened. Emotions sometimes make us do things we later regret and wish we listened to our reason. In this way emotions make us irrational and it's possible that they may influence negatively our long-term interests. On the other hand, they don't allow us to think something over, so we act before we get stressed or threatened which is helpful in some situations (for example if we want to start a conversation with a beautiful stranger). 

Reason always searches for the most appropriate (optimal) solution based on facts and their most possible impact on us. It takes into account both advantages and downsides. It makes a kind of a calculation of positive and negative influence and helps us choose the best option. However, it takes time to make a decision based on reason and it also happens that despite long and complicated thinking process we haven't chosen the right way. 

 

That's why it's vital to reconcile emotions and reason. It may seem impossible, but although they can't work together, their mixing gives us the highest probability of the right choice. For example negative emotions can improve decisions involving risk. 

Emotion in slow motion

How do we communicate? Do we only have our languages? Maybe there are more ways of communication? How do we show that we like something or not? How do we express our feelings, our emotions? Can the language say everything?

Each one of us has this wonderful ability to communicate using words and expressions. But we also have something more primitive that lets us manifest ourselves and tell others how we feel. Expression of  EMOTIONS happens all the time - even a small gesture can show our approval, astonishment, delight or sadness. However, there are 6 basic emotions, common for all the people in the world. 

These are:

- anger

- disgust

- fear

- happiness

- sadness

- surprise.

There are many ways to express the emotions, for example some special phrases, tone of voice, facial expressions, gestures, posture or movements. Every person is able also to read someone's emotion by analysing these factors. Since we react differently to situations that happen to us, it's vital to understand these expressions.

Me love you

Nowadays technology becomes more and more advanced to make our lives easier. We have our modern machines, factories, power plants and highly developed house devices, home automation or intelligent vacuum cleaners. That all is supposed to make us save time and money and so to have more free time for entertainment, friends and family. But are we really happier than before? 

Actually many people feel lonely and are therefore more sorrowful than just a decade ago. This growing number of lonely people made scientists and inventors think of something that could replace absent friends and provide us with a sentient, supporting "creature" which requires almost nothing, but can give us almost everything - feelings and understanding. 

ROBOT - BETTER HUMAN?

The idea of a robot to be a human friend arose probably with invention of the first more developed robot. In our times of indifference this concept could be really successful. Just imagine - you feel lonely and have no-one you could talk to, the only thing you gotta do is to spend some money and bring home a brand new friend. It needs just some energy, but gives you its attention that lets you express your emotions, fears and dreams. It listens to you, no matter what you say. It supports you and says that everything's gonna be ok. If you've got a family and children, it'll take care of them and play with them. It's a good solution for older people who have no one else in the world.

On the other hand, we cannot forget that a robot, no matter how similar to human he'd look, is never going to be one of us. It's just an artificial thing, kind of a toy that can speak and seems to listen. Although we speak of sentient robots, it's impossible to create a robot that could feel and have emotions like we do. It would be a way of deceiving ourselves. If we began to treat it like a person, we'd become attached to it emotionally and after some time could not imagine our life without it. And what if a robot breaks down? This would be like a death of a very close person. Unfortunately, it's just an artificial device and the problem begins when we forget about it. The need to buy such a robot comes from emotional lacks. In the past there was only one solution for that problem. Now it's perhaps easier, but it doesn't mean better. I think also of all the great companies that would profit by selling robots. For them that would be just another way of multiplying their wealth. They don't care that robots could help some people; they care only about their money.

It's so sad for me that there are so many people in the world, but so few friends that we have to "build" our own. Anyway, a robot could never replace a real human, an animal or even a plant. Instead of trying to create something against the nature, we should notice how many other people need us - and that we need them too.

As far as I know...

"Language is the human capacity for acquiring and using complex systems of communication, and a language is any specific example of such a system."

That's what Wikipedia says, if you ask it for a definition of a "language". But these two simple sentences don't inform us, how important the language is and how it can differ. There are over 6000 languages all over the world. The words are the language's carriers of information. However, here begins one of the greatest problems of humanity - when a word has more than one meaning and when we use specific ways of constructing our utterances. Even if two people speak the same language, they use and form it in different ways. MEN AND WOMAN are a great example of that.

Women tend to describe things with many details and distinguish between shades of colours. What for a woman is pale blue, cornflower, sky-blue, navy-blue, turquoise or azure, is for a man just blue. 

Women often use tag questions, for example: "This film is really boring, isn't it?". It gives their conversation partner a feeling that they're not sure of what they're saying. It seems like they're looking for confirmation of their words which can be perceived as a lack of self-consciousness and may influence negatively the way the men respond to it.

There are some other expressions that are characteristic to women. "As far as I know" is one of them which evokes similar response as tag questions. Using them women tend to hold the person they're talking with responsible for the decisions which are discussed in the conversation.

What is especially winsome about women's language is calling other people honey, sweet-heart, darling, my dear or sweetie. In many cases it shows emotions and feelings (of course, it's sometimes just irony or habit).

Men usually use shorter and conciser sentences. It's more important for them to give only the vital information than to describe things in a very precise way. When they've said everything they were supposed to their job's been done here and from now on it doesn't really matter, if the receiver of their message understood it clearly and in details.

Men don't really use tag questions and expressions similar to that. If they have something to say, they say it with a dot at the end of the sentence. 

An ordinary man speaks more among a big group of people and less when he's in a company of only one person (especially if this person is a woman). He also prefers short jokes or small-talk rather than "confessions" or sharing one's secrets.

Unlike most of women, men prefer not to show their uncertainty. They're also not afraid of saying out loud what they think of something, even if it will cause a fierce discussion or aggression. They're ready to defend their point of view sometimes using unacceptable methods, even if it's wrong and they know that.

Although there are so many differences between language of men and women, they are still able to communicate effectively. Of course, these are all great generalisations, but they probably help us understand other people. Many factors may have influence on how we form the sentences to express our thoughts. It's fascinating that we've found our ways to properly read the hidden information from someone's utterance.