The Reasoning Process And Scientific Method

The Reasoning Process is the only valid source of sensory knowledge, knowledge of reality. However, most people tend to be more familiar with the Scientific Method since it’s more commonly taught in public schools. The Scientific Method is similar to the Reasoning Process, but broken up into more steps and geared towards writing scientific research papers. It goes as follows:

1. Define a question.
2. Gather information and resources (observe).
3. Form an explanatory hypothesis.
4. Test the hypothesis by performing an experiment and collecting data in a reproducible manner.
5. Analyze the data.
6. Interpret the data and draw conclusions that serve as a starting point for a new hypothesis.
7. Publish results.
8. Retest (frequently done by other scientists).

The last step of the Scientific Method is to repeat the steps, because a proper theory of knowledge must be inductive, not deductive. Although forms of deductive reasoning exist, people are always bound to make mistakes. Making mistakes and understanding how they were made is part of learning, hence why both the Scientific Method and Reasoning Process are done recursively in a repetitive cycle.

At some point, all the Laws of Nature were originally deemed hypotheses. Until that point, people continue building confidence in them, or they lose confidence in it until they reject it.

In every field, one learns the basics, and if they go further then they can start to do research in that field. But there are some fields where doing the basics is truly much different than what an expert would be expected to do:

• In mathematics, one first learns how to do math, then they move on to proving theorems and the like.
• In computer science, one first learns how to program, then they move on to learning what computers are doing and how they work.
• In linguistics, one first learns languages and the basics, then they start doing research and maybe they might even document languages.

Note: I haven’t finished writing this file yet. It takes time to write stuff.

See: Directional And Non-Directional Hypotheses.

Differential And Correlation Hypotheses can both be Non-Directional Hypotheses and Directional Hypotheses.

Notes for Summarizing the Types of Hypotheses:

• Differential Hypotheses apply to categories (discrete data).
• Correlational Hypotheses apply to quantitative variables (quantitative data).
• Non-directional hypotheses are vague, and always less preferable when directional hypotheses can be written to accurately describe data instead.
• Directional Hypotheses have more predictive power than non-directional hypotheses, if proven true.
• Null hypotheses assume that there is no difference between categories, with respect to a characteristic.
• Alternative Hypotheses are the same as Difference Hypotheses.
• For Correlation Hypotheses, you would use a correlation test, like Pearson’s Correlation Coefficient (r).
• Null/Alternative Hypothesis Tests are not used for testing correlations, because they are types of difference hypotheses, not correlational hypotheses.

The Science of Thinking - Veritasium: Veritasium explains how our brains automate much of thinking by using heuristics and long-term memory, and the key to getting smarter is to force ourselves to think through things methodically step-by-step.

The Four Things it Takes to be an Expert: Veritasium explains how repeated attempts, a valid consistent environment, timely feedback, and pushing the boundaries of our skills are the four steps to becoming an expert at anything.

• Habitually Doing Research Before Attempting A Task.
• Understanding That All Knowledge Is Ultimately Based On A Model Of Experience And The Limits Of Knowledge.
• Questioning Everything, Including The Foundation And Underlying Assumptions Of One’s Own Knowledge.
• Being Able To Detect And Identify Bias, Acknowledge Multiple Perspectives, And Think Without Biases.
• Recognizing Unstated Assumptions And Values.
• Understanding The Importance Of Evidence And The Levels Of Certainty/Skepticism.
• Updating One’s Belief System On The Basis Of Wider Experience.
• Reasoning Skills Continued.

Skills relating to the Reasoning Process:

• Gathering and connecting pertinent (relevant) information.
• Recognizing problems, and finding workable means for solving those problems.
• Habitually figuring out the best way to do/learn/use something before doing that action.
• Habitually starting with the basics and definitions before moving forward on a topic.
  • This is especially important because if the knowledge is wrong, then so is everything based upon it.
• Understanding the relevant methods, techniques, and criteria for making judgments.
• Understanding the reasoning process, its limits, and how it can be wrong.
• Understanding formal logic and inference rules.
• Understanding fallacies and how to avoid making them.
• Being able to transfer intuition (subconscious reasoning) into conscious thinking.
• Knowing how to form warranted conclusions, valid arguments, and sound arguments.
• Testing the conclusions and generalizations at which one arrives.
• Distinguishing between ’rational’ and ’rationalized’, AKA the “reason” versus “justification” dichotomy.
• Using and comprehending language with accuracy, clarity, and discernment.

In sum, Critical Thinking is “a persistent effort to examine any belief or supposed form of knowledge in the light of the evidence that supports or refutes it and the further conclusions to which it tends.” -Edward Glaser (1941)

People would ask questions so much more often if they knew and mastered the reasoning skill for accessing the thoughts formed by one’s own intuition.

Mantras To Say To Invoke Using Reasoning Skills In Appropriate Situations
Note: These are situations where not saying the mantras would cause the person thinking/saying the mantras to be less likely to use the reasoning skill associated with that mantra.

• Use reason.
• Why am I feeling this way?
• What is causing me to feel this way?
• What am I subconsciously noticing?
• What is leading me to speculate this?

The phrase “Use reason” for invoking the inclination to use reason to solve a problem might be considered a case where the habitual use of a mantra improves the brain’s intelligence by elevating its ability to solve problems (in this case by habitually reminding it to do something that it otherwise wouldn’t do)

Other similar cases that might not exactly count as mantras since their wordings can vary might be: “Why am I thinking this?” or “Why is mind noticing this conspicuous instance X?”

Note: This section is a work in progress. It takes time to write stuff.

Rationality is much more than avoiding contradictions and fallacies. True rationality also entails understanding that knowledge is formed according to belief networks in coherentism, that all knowledge is constrained by our sensory input, that beliefs do not magically come out reason, recognizing implicit assumptions and selective attention, distinguishing sensory knowledge from value knowledge, values are subjective, etc.

Even for the theorems that can be proven by performative contradictions, the brain technically doesn’t have to except the premises that lead to the contradictions, just as subjects don’t have to exist that their objective purpose is to survive, reproduce, and have children.

Honesty is part of intelligence and rationality. Truly intelligent people must be honest about all topics.

Also see: Being “Rational” Isn’t What You Think - Luke Smith.