Logic

In the past year, much of the population has bandied around the words logic and facts as if they know what they mean. In regards to facts, there are certain ideologies that we've constructed about our universe that we can all agree for the most part, as factual and true. Then there's the idea of facts being that which is declared as true by those who we choose to align ourselves with. But, I'm not wishing to speak of facts. Logic, I find, is an interesting subject, for most of us believe we employ logic in our everyday rationality of the world around us. Logic is "the science of distinction of true from false reasoning" [Source]. Scientists have given us a set of guidelines for obtaining logical conclusions to any hypothesis (personally, I think many confuse hypothesis with conclusive evidence in this day and age):

1. Make an observation.
2. Ask a question.
3. Form a hypothesis or testable explanation.
4. Make a prediction based on the hypothesis.
5. Test the prediction.
6. Iterate: use the results to make new hypotheses or predictions (as needed.) [Source]

As a side thought, at the beginning of last Spring, I posted something on Facebook asking why we would ridicule an idea that had already been proven by scientists two decades prior as valid and therefore accepted by the medical community as true. I was told it was "pseudoscience." (Just one of many instances I have of where rationality went out the window in favor of the group narrative.)

I was thinking about logic today because I was having one of those imaginary conversations some of us end up formulating in our minds (either you think I'm crazy or you know exactly what I'm talking about.) It regarded the difference between my experience and someone else's who was more than willing to "set me straight" on what I could see versus what he could see. (Just a note, daydreams can sometimes suck if you feel argumentative. Lol!) He went on to explain to me in great detail why what I saw was a mere optical illusion and could be explained by various anomalies or problems concerning the eye. (I can be quite technical in my daydreams.) In response, I, of course, ripped him a new one explaining my qualifications for rational thought, listing my college GPA, IQ testing score, and even how I managed to ace my science and math finals miraculously. (This is not something I would normally do in real life as GPAs are based upon, for the most part, your ability to memorize and focus, and IQ tests are based upon your ability to rationalize patterns and abstract thought - of which many artists would excel. Neither delves into the genius that lies in everyone that is undetectable by such methods. We all have genius and it cannot be boxed into one small category of excellence, thus making it ridiculous and devaluing. It ends up creating an irrational categorization of worth that needs to be overhauled.) I then went on to explain that limitation of thought, and therefore experience, endows people with an irrational idea that their experience is the only true one and any experience that anyone has outside of their understanding must have either 1.) an inability to think rationally by testing their hypothesis using the scientific method or 2.) an over-active imagination. I will be the first to say I do have an over-active imagination, which I'm absolutely and irrevocably ecstatic to have. My imagination allows me to explore in ways that I rarely see in others. It allows me to question everything that comes into my existence and if certain "irrational" things could be a part of that existence, which then allows me to explore the possibilities of how to implement things that make no rational thought in the society of that which surrounds me into my own experience. Can something that seems irrational, illogical, and unsubstantiated by traditional science (Quantum Physics is a whole different subject) be brought into existence through changing ideology and through practice? At this point in my life with the experiences I have had come into my knowledge, my answer is an emphatic yes. Just about anything I can set my mind to can be had. It's just a "small" matter of figuring out how to get the mind, heart, and body lined up into believing it.

Limitation of thought has us casting judgment upon others and devaluing their beingness.
Their experience is not our experience. We have the tendency to cast judgment before even asking questions, which shows our own limitations, as well as our intelligence. So, before casting judgments upon others, I hope we all will consider asking ourselves the following questions first before declaring other's beingness as less than:

1. Have I asked any clarifying questions?
2. Are the other person's words a possible explanation of something within my own experience that I use different words for? (ie. In Christian terminology, God is used to explain the all-powerful creator. In other religions, it may be Allah, Demeter, Odin, Gitche Manitou. In Atheist's terminology, it may be Energy or Interconnection. Asking more clarifying questions may help.)
3. If it's not something that I have experienced, is there a method, practice, or research that I can do to perhaps share in or understand that experience?
4. If I am not understanding at all, how may I better hear the other person? Do I need to let go of some of my own biases?
5. Is my judgment really necessary in forcing upon another? If so, what does my righteousness say about my own self-worth?
6. What are my most important values in life and am I expressing them in this situation?
7. Is my judgment based upon what I have been told by external sources as being true in life? Have I ever questioned the validity of that information within my own experience? Why or why not?