Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 96 ) - Logical Positivism

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 96 ) - Logical Positivism


This branch of philosophy of logic had arisen during the 1920-30s and is closely linked to the Vienna School of philosophers. Briefly stated, Logical Positivismi is one of the most dominant branches of philosophy in the Twentieth Century which requires strict and objective proof of every statement made and each theory proposed regarding any discipline of learning. It has positively affected the thinkings of reseachers and theorists alike in various branches of science and philosophy. It would not be an exaggeration to say that logical Positivism has created a new paradigm in both the science and arts disciplines in their theoretical as well as practical aspects. It all started with the ideas of Ludwig Wittgenstein, a Viennese philosopher who went to war in the Austrian army during World War One. Wittgenstein not only fought bravely for the Austrian emperor but also created a whole set of logical thoughts while serving in the army. In his great classical work Tractatus Logico- Philosophicus he set forth in meticulous details his philosophical views on language, thoughts and reality which became the corner stone of the paradigm shifting school of philosophy known as Logical Positivism. 

His ingenious insights succeeded in forging a sound philosophical connection between the inner world of our thoughts through our language with the reality. It is a brilliant piece of original inspiration enshrined in a comprehensive set of working principles touching every aspect of the world of knowledge, our inner world of thoughts and our world of communication that is our language. The basic rationale for his philosophy is his idea that there must be something in common between the structure of a sentence and the reality that the sentence is referring to. Representation of the reality in our thoughts is made possible by logic but logical propositions themselves are not the true reality ( this is reminiscent of Einstein's comments on mathematical logic quoted in the last chapter ). Therefore, logic is the necessary but not sufficient condition for describing objective reality (OR). This argument is equally applicable to our language which follows the same set of logical system as our thoughts. His demonstration of this argument through his “picture theory of language“ is most convincing. He likened logical propositions to pictures reflecting OR. They are only approximations but can never be 100% of the real thing. Different logical symbols are just like different colours and images in different pictures. They may be able to mimic OR to a very great extent but can never be perfect. The same is true of language which uses a different set of symbols to describe OR. Both logical propositions and language symbols may bear remarkable resemblance to OR they represent but only to certain limits.

Based on this rationale, linguistic statements are only meaningful when they can be related to OR and only observations can prove if such statements are true or false. Furthermore, there can only be two types of statements. First, there are analytical ones which have no empirical contents meaning that they cannot be verified against OR because they do not refer to OR or any objectively observable facts. These are also known as tautologies. For example, the statement :- “ The poor are poor because of their poverty” is a tautology. It is analytical in the sense that it does not refer to anything outside of itself. In other words, it has no empirical content. All the other statements that are not analytical are empirical statements which refer to OR and some objectively observable facts. These are the only meaningful statements because they can be proven right or wrong by reference to the fact that they allege to assert. The above rigid but practical rules make Logical Positivism a very powerful tool in all fields of knowledge including scientific research. It is the logical positivist's motto that if you cannot prove what you say by empirical evidence, you have effectively said nothing. Other Vienna School philosophers built upon this basic theory of Wittgenstein and subsequently formalize the principles to form the Logical Positivism school of philosophy.

The huge impact of Logical Positivism on all aspects of early Twentieth Century science and philosophy had become a big challenge to Cartesian Dualism which had the support of organised religion since the Seventeenth Century. Logical Positivism had unintentionally became the vanguard and a powerful weapon for Monoism. However, there is still some weaknesses in Logical Positivism insofar as it still has to rely on the Verification Principle in proving its case empirically, and therefore, is still restricted by the inborn weakness of the Theory of Induction. Take the inductionist approach in verifying a scientific fact like the sun always rises in the east. Scientists are said to have proven their case with regard to this scientific fact because in the whole of human history up to the present the sun has always risen from the east. Their case is said to have been proven empirically thousands upon thousands of times but it only takes one case of falsification to shoot down the above scientific statement. This is the inherent weakness of the induction method. Of course we know in this incident that the sun will only cease to rise from the east in about 500 million more years' time when its nuclear fuel burns out. There is an informative story about the inductionist method. Once there is a farm full of happy little pigs which are all inductionists. They consider themselves to be smarter than all other pigs in the world because these little pigs know how to predict the future using the induction method. Every morning they are very happy to see their master who opens the gates to feed them. They enjoy life to the full because the pigs only eat and do not have to work. According to their inductionist analysis based on past experience they figure that seeing their master is the greatest joy in the lives. One day as usual, their master comes to open the gates. They greet him with all the usual happy grunts only to find out that they are bound and led to the abattoir to be slaughtered. So, those poor pigs' inductionist predictions did not save them from certain destruction. Therefore, there is no foolproof reliability in the inductionist method and so is the case for any method of prediction. 

This unavoidable weakness in the Theory of Induction has prompted one of the most promising young philosophers of the 1940s called Karl Popper to pioneer his own set of principles in the learning process and scientific research. Popper based his philosophy on what he called the conjecture and refutation procedure. Instead of asking the scientists to prove that their theories are true to empirical observations and experimental results, Popper requires them to concentrate on devising procedures to prove that their theories on conjectures are wrong. This is Popper's famous conjecture and refutation procedure. According to his reasoning, if a certain theory or conjecture has more ways of being refuted it is to be preferred over one which has fewer. By his presumption of the negative results of any scientific theory or conjecture, Popper places tremendous onus on the scientists to prove their case and, thereby, achieving a higher standard for scrutinizing any scientific theory. I do not intend to go into his philosophy in depth but suffice it to say at the present juncture that it does have its weaknesses such as what is known to the philosophy circle as the Problem of Auxiliary Hypothesis. For example, when a conjecture is refuted for any reason it can always be saved by the proposer on the ground that some of the underlying background assumptions that are at fault and not the main body of the conjecture. This will imply that the same conjecture can still survive the “ conjecture and refutation procedure “ after amending its background assumptions. For example, there is the often cited Red Ferrari Hypothesis which states that all Ferraris are red. It can be refuted easily if you see a white one. However, the proposer of the hypothesis can always say that you must have mistaken a white Lamborghini for a Ferrari. There are lots of possible excuses such as someone must have modified the original red paint to white and so on and so forth. So, you will see that no system is totally infallible. 

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 83 ) - Theory and Reality

 Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 83 ) - Theory and Reality

Theory and Reality

 All theories are necessarily approximation of the reality they purport to describe and predict. Otherwise, they will be too specific to have any predictive power. We may as well take each real life scenario to transform it into individual theories which are accurate to every minor detail. But then, there would be numerous theories to cover every real life scenario thus rendering the them useless for lack of generality and predictive value. Theories are by nature theoretical ( here comes another one of my tautologies ! ). Let me tell you a short story about theories and theorists. When I attended my first lecture in economics on my first day at the Hong Kong University back in 1968, our lecturer at the time was an economist who was previously employed by the United Nations as a consulting economist. Before starting the lecture on economics, he said he would tell us an interesting story after which we will definitely realise what economics is all about. It goes like this. There was once a centipede ( a small crawling venomous creature with 100 small little legs ) which has lost one of its legs. It has heard that the owl is the wisest creature around in the forest world. So, the centipede paid the wise old owl a visit to ask for help to heal its leg. After a lot of close examination and serious pondering by the wise old owl, the wise guy was only able to come up with a puzzled grin in his eyes and some undulating wrinkles on his forehead. The owl told the centipede that with all his great knowledge about nature he regretted that there was nothing he could do to reverse the course of the centipede's misfortune. However, the owl knew of a even wiser creature called the economist who could play magic by using only limited means to meet unlimited ends with the material world. Perhaps, the economist was smart enough to conjure up something for the centipede. So, it immediately went to see the smart economist. Without much hesitation, the economist said to the centipede :- “ I cannot help you to recover your leg but I may be able to reduce your level of injury and disability by 90%. “ The centipede was overjoyed to hear the good news. “ Please, tell me how this can be done. I will surely repay your kindness when I have the chance “ said the centipede. “ O.K. ! It's easy “ said the economist , “ you can reduce your disability by 90% if you turn yourself into a millipede which has 1000 legs. “ The centipede was dumbfounded. “ How could I do this ? “ it protested. “ Don't ask me ,“ said the economist,:- “ I am only a theorist. I base my theory on sound logic but as regards implementation you have to ask the technicians. Implementation is not the responsibility of my department.” There you have it. Theories mostly work on principles and approximations. The story itself is an extreme case of pure theorisation and real life economists do come up with practical solutions for economic problems. For example, J.M. Keynes' important economic theories on government fiscal expenditure and deficit financing reversed the course of the world depression in the 1930s resulting from the great Wall Street Crash of 1929. However, the story does hight light the necessarily general nature of all theories. I hope that given time and further efforts my theory will become more systematic and user friendly. 

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 82 ) - Why nothing is really news at all- March 30, 2012

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 82 ) - Why nothing is really news at all - ALTERNATIVE HISTORY THEORY

by Joseph K. H. Cheng on Friday, March 30, 2012 at 11:15am ·

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-17560252

The above link to a BBC NEWS report is a very useful look at the way we view our own reality. It suggests that we should not only consider what has actually happened but also what might have happened in assessing our own reality and welfare in any given situation. Without doing that we would not have taken a comprehensive perspective in our assessment. This deficiency may lead to a pessimistic view of how things are for us. It pays to take the view that things could always be worse. More importantly, taking a wider perspective will also save us from being fooled by politicians' claim especially the ruling government that they are the only heroes in running our country and that no one else will do.

This report is directly related to the very important and yet generally ignored ALTERNATIVE HISTORY ( AH ) theory. We always talk about opportunity cost in finance and economics. AH is a similar approach applied to our reality. It is well supported by science in the form of the MANY WORLDS INTERPRETATION ( infinite possibilities to be realized by our own choice - free will ) in Quantum Mechanics. Also, MANY WORLDS interpretation of Quantum Mechanics implies that anything can happen no matter how rare it might be just like someone winning a lottery which has only a very slim chance for winning or a very freak accident happening to people. AH's most important lesson is that don't just consider what has happened in assessing your own welfare but also what might have happened. Of course, MIGHT HAVE is difficult to quantify yet without considering the ALTERNATIVE ( possible ) HISTORY we will not be taking a complete perspective in our assessment. For those interested in MANY WORLDS INTERPRETATION of Quantum Mechanics please read chapter 3 of my book - The Universe - A Personal View at this link :- https://docs.google.com/viewer?a=v&pid=sites&srcid=ZGVmYXVsdGRvbWFpbnxqa2hjbGlmZXN0eWxlfGd4OjM5NmM2NTViMjAzY2M5MTk

To be a smart thinker, we must take the ALTERNATIVE HISTORY into consideration when assessing a given situation.

Your views and comments are most welcome !

JKHC.

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 67 ) - April 2, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 67 ) - Self Reference Statement ( 自我參照的句子) - April 2, 2011

Language, logic and truth are all inter-connected like most natural or inter-personal phenomena in this world. In fact, language is the product of our consciousness which is in turn the basis and tool for our understanding of reality as we know it. According to the famous British scientist and mathematical physicist, Sir Roger Penrose who wrote the huge book The Road to Reality : A Complete guide to the Laws of the Universe there are, in fact, three separate sets of realities in this world - the physical world governed by invariant laws of nature ; our private mental world controlled by our own personal creative and imaginative rules and the perfect but theoretical mathematical world operated by rules of pure logic with absolute accuracy.
語言，邏輯和真理，都是互相關聯的事物，這就正如大多數自然界和人際關係的事情一般。其實，語言是我們意識下的產品，而意識又是我們接觸現實的基礎和工 具。根據英國數學物理學家，羅渣本諾斯 （ Sir Roger Penrose ) 在他的長達一千頁的巨著，The Road to Reality : A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe ( 到現實之路）中所詳述，現實是分為三個層面的。它們就是，被永不變易定律控制着的自然世界，擁有着個人的創造性和強大幻想力的精神世界，以及完美和純邏輯的精 確數學世界三者。


Let us talk about the language we must use to communicate with other living beings to get some insight into this important communication tool. Apart from the Ex-ante and Ex-post statements ( see my blog entry here :- http://jkhcforum.blogspot.com/2011/03/thoughts-to-you-from-yours-truly-65.html ) with predictive and simply historical contents respectively there are also some special cases of logically inconsistent statements in terms of their content. These are called self reference statements as discovered by the great British philosopher, Bertrand Russell. Although this is a very special case smart thinkers should also be aware of its existence to avoid getting into an illogical fallacy.
讓我們談談有關語言這種重要的溝通工具，希望藉機獲得一些深刻見解。除了以前提及的Ex-ante ( 前瞻句）和Ex-post (事後句），分別為預測性和歷史性的句語（ 在我這裡的部落格可重溫 http://jkhcforum.blogspot.com/2011/03/thoughts-to-you-from- yours-truly-65.html ）之外，也有些特殊句子，它們裡面是存在着一些邏輯上的謬誤，稱為self reference statement （自我參照句子），是偉大的英國哲學家，羅素（Bertrand Russell )所發現的。雖然它們只是極少數例子，但是作為一個有醒目思維的人，我們也應該認識到它們的性質和存在,以免墮入它們的邏輯謬誤中。


Take this question for example :- " This statement is wrong, true or false ? " If we say " true " then it would mean that the statement is wrong. On the other hand, if we say " false " it would mean that the statement is right. Either way, we end up with an illogical answer. The reason lies with the negative meaning of the word wrong and the positive and negative meanings of the other two words " true " and " false " respectively. Since the statement itself refers to nothing outside its own construction ( or some other fact apart from itself ) it is called a self reference statement. This will result in the combined effect of the word " wrong " ( a negative ) with the word " false " ( another negative ) to make the result positive ( implying the positive and opposite meaning of " right " ) - two negatives make a positive. If the other positive word " true " is applied then the resulting meaning will be of a negative meaning " wrong " ) - a negative and a positive makes a negative. This is interesting but shows that there exist inconsistencies in our language.
拿以下的問題為例:「這句子是錯的，是或否？」如果我們說是，那句子便是錯的了。反之，如果我們說否，那句子便是對的了。這樣一來，無論我們說是或否，都會產生邏輯上的謬誤。原 因在於那個錯字，是有負面的意思，而是與否兩者，卻分別帶着正面和負面的意思。由於這句子是自我參照句，即是說它只是針對自己，沒有涉及句子以外的事物。 這樣，如果我們說否，否字和錯字都是負面的意思，於是負負得正，便得到相反的正確那意思。假如我們說是字，這則有正面的意思，而錯字卻有負面意思，這樣一 來，正負便得負，所以句子便有錯的意思，這也正是其原本字面的意思。以上的情況，十分有趣，但比較罕見，卻證明了我們日常所用的語言，當中確是存在着一些 邏輯上的謬誤，切記為上策！


JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 65 ) - March, 27, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 65 ) - Ex-ante and Ex-post Statements ( 前瞻句與事後句 ) - March 27, 2011

To think smart, we need to know what we are talking about. In terms of statement contents there are mainly two types of statements we can make. The contents may be predictive in nature which are known technically as Ex-ante statements or statement before the facts have occurred. Alternatively, the contents may be purely narrative or descriptive which are known technically as Ex-post statements or statements after the facts. It is of vital importance to distinguish the former from the latter. If we fail to do this we will most likely come to the wrong conclusion based on what we or other people say.
要有醒目的思維，我們先得了解，自己和他人講話的內容。以內容分類，句子可以主要分作前瞻句子和事後句子兩大類。第一種是有預測性的，叫作前瞻句 （ Ex-ante )，或是稱為事情未發生前的預料。第二種是事後的描述，叫作事後句 （ Ex-post )，或是稱為歷史性的描述。能分辨二者，是很重要的事。為因把它們混淆了，有可能會令我們達至錯誤的結論。


An example of an Ex-ante statement would be :- " I am going to work hard to pass my upcoming examination." Here, I am predicting some thing that is going to happen, namely, future hard work. On the other hand, if I say to my my wife that :- " It is destiny that has led to our chanced meeting and our happy marriage." Here, it is only a statement after the facts of our meeting and marriage. It is history so to speak. We usually have no problems with Ex-ante statements most of which we can easily understand. As regards Ex-post statements we may sometimes attribute to them predictive implications that they do not possess.
讓我舉一個前瞻句的例子，比如我說：「我會努力準備將會來臨的考試。」在這裡，我是預言某些事情的發生，即是說我將會用功。相反地，如果我對太太說：「 是命運安排，令我們相識和結婚。」在這裡，我只是指出這些既定的事實，只是歷史吧了，並無甚麼預測性的內容，這便是事後句子。我們通常很容易明白前瞻句 子，但是對事後句便會有疑難了。問題多出在，錯誤地給予事後句子，一些預測性的能力, 其實它們並沒有這些能耐。


Take my last statement to my wife about destiny for example, I have actually implied that destiny is a supernatural force that has caused us to meet and fall in love whereas it was our free will and personal choices that had caused our marriage to occur. Another example can be found in economics and other intellectual disciplines. When we say the demand for a certain commodity is elastic we are referring to the whole demand curve of that commodity reflecting quantities demanded at different prices when a more than proportional amount is demanded as that of the fall in price. It is an Ex-ante statement making a prediction on the behaviour of the quantities demanded at various prices. On the other hand, simply stating the quantity demanded at a certain price is an Ex-post statement which simply reflects a historic relation between the quantity demanded at a given price. It is history at a point in time. Please be smart thinkers and be able to distinguish between the two kinds of statements for clear thinking.
再次檢討我對太太說有關命運之言論，其實我是暗示了命運是有一種超自然力量，更加可以安排人的未來，當然這是不正確的，因為結婚是我們個人選擇，而相遇也 只是歷史事實。試想，在我們相遇的同一場合，也有其他人存在，為什麼又不說我們和他們有緣份呢？十分明確地，我們的個人選擇，決定了我們自己的將來。另外一個例子，可以在經濟學和其他類似學科尋找到。當我們說某種商品的需求是具有彈性的，這顯示商品被需求的數量增加，會比價格的跌幅比例為大。這是一種 前瞻句子，可以預測那商品在不同價格下，的不同被需求數量，是有預測性的。反之，我們如說，某一商品在某一價格的被需求數量是若干，這便是一種事後句子， 它只是一種歷史的描述。要有醒目的思維，我們必須把二者分辨出來，才可達到清晰的思考過程。


JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 64 ) - March, 13, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 64 ) - Reductionist vs. Holistic Approach ( 歸納法和整體觀 ) - March 13, 2011

Behind all the monumental achievements of modern science and technology ( of course with the related threats to human lives and our environment as well ) there lies a very powerful tool in problem solving used since the birth of modern science in the Sixteenth Century at the times of Galileo, Newton and Descartes. This approach in problem solving is called the reductionist method whereby complicated things or problems are broken down into smaller individual parts. Then, we study how each small part works and put them back together again to understand the overall mode of operation. This method is so successful that most if not all scientists follow this method to the present day.
在我們現有空前成功的科技背面，是存在着一種十分強有力的工具。它便是起源於十六世紀，加里略，牛頓和狄格司等人那時代的，新科學紀元開始使用， 來解決問題的歸納法。這個方法，是將複雜的事物，化整為零，將每個小部分加以分析，了解它的操作情況，然後把它們整合起來，以確定整體的操作程式。由於這 方法極度成功，所以到了今天，絕大科學家都仍然樂於用它。


Then, the biological sciences including genetic and neuro sciences and most importantly the behavioural sciences come on the scene and scientists are greatly puzzled at the apparent failure of the reductionist approach to solve the important problems such as the causes of cancer and investor behaviour. Finally, some philosophers ( many of whom are scientists ) studying the working principles of the scientific method come up with an explanation. Among them the Nobel Laureate, Ilya Prigogine ( who is awarded the Nobel Prize for his profound discovery of complexity and the emergence of life ) discovers that in most bio-systems there are multi-feedback loops meaning individual factors in a system do not affect the system in one way traffic. The factors, in fact, interacts with one another in endless interactive-cycles to create endless ripple effects. In short, one plus one can be more than two. This is easily seen in the economy ( a social system ) as the " Multiplier Effect " that will give rise to vicious cycles making the end result much greater than the initial input such as an increase in consumer spending. To understand the multilateral interactions properly a holistic approach must be adopted. As opposed to the reductionist method, the holistic approach looks at the system as a whole to understand how the related parts interact with one another.
到了生物學和社會科學的面世，包括遺傳學, 神經系統研究，以及行為科學等更複雜的範疇要處理，歸納法便難以應付。科學家們感到十分困惑，為什麼這一向效的工具，不 能解釋有如投資者心態，以及癌症起因等問題呢。最後，一些科學上的哲學家，提出了答案。包括 諾貝爾獎得主柏力高堅( Ilya Prigogine )等人，提出了在複雜的生物學系統中，會出現很多相對互動的因素，影響不是單方面的，導致複雜和不可預料的結果，一加一是可以多於二的通常結果。 Prigogine 的得獎理論，是解釋生命是可能由複雜互動系統中演變出來的。生命的真正來源，到今天仍是神秘的謎。他的理論指出，相向互動的因素，會產生無止境的波浪效 應，互相影響，結果難測。就有如經濟學上的倍數效應( Multiplier Effect )，一些少量的消費可以造成大於原本數目的消費總和。要了解複雜的互動因素，我們必須以整體觀來分析這些因素，注意整體的效應，而不是個別因素的簡單總 和。

This is not new at all. It can be traced back some 5,000 years to the Chinese tradition and theories of the great philosophy book the famous I-Ching. We have heard so much about the great human genome project that has decoded the entire human genome of over 100,000 pairs of human genes. At first, scientists think we can proceed to discover all the genetic causes of all human diseases. Hold your horses because it is not that easy ! The reason is simple. While it has been discovered that the defects in certain genes are related to some diseases the combined effects of other genes have been found to counteract some defects to prevent occurrence of the related diseases. There is just no definite one to one relation. Therefore, the overall perspective has once again proven to be crucial.
整體觀並不是新概念，我們可以將它追索到五千年前中國的易經裡面。我們聽說很多有關人類基因的分析計劃， 科學家把整個人類的超過十萬對基因排列出來了。起初，科學家雀躍不已，認為可以很快尋找出，所有疾病的基因來源。可惜這只是空歡喜一場，因為事情並沒有這 般簡單。他們雖然尋找出一些基因與某些疾病的聯繫性，但他們亦發現有其他基因，會作出對抗性的均衡作用，抵消了這些壞基因的影響，甚而數個基因互相控制一些病 因。結論是，一對一的關係，並不存在。這一再證明整體觀的重要性。


For example, while western medicine is effective in dealing with emergency medical conditions by surgery and radiation treatment Chinese medicine is more suited to treating long term ailments like rheumatism through the strengthening of the immunity system by the use of herbal medicine and acupuncture. The former directly attacks the part of the body where the trouble appears while the latter takes a wider perspective or holistic approach of treating the whole immune system. Western and oriental medicines were once seen as mutually exclusive but nowadays both are adopting the strength of the other. Western medicine has used acupuncture as alternative medicine while Chinese medicine has also adopted the scientific approach of quantifying the potency of herbal medicine. That is a very good sign as there is no single golden rule that can cure everything. We should adopt the same attitude to become smart thinkers.
再拿一個例子來說，西方醫學對緊急醫學情況，是特別有效的。它可以用外科手術和放射性治療，對付癌症和緊急症狀，但對於長期疾病，如風濕等，便不及中醫的治本了，中醫以草藥和針灸，給予徹底醫理。西方醫學，對點治療，但比不上中醫的針對免疫系統，固本培源， 那般轍底。從 前，中西醫學是被視為兩不相容的。到了現在，西方醫學，已開始使用，針灸等中醫療法，稱之另類療法。中醫也進行中藥科學化，以確定它的準確藥力。這都是十 分令人鼓勵的發展。解決事情，沒有唯一的金科玉律，以適當的方法，處理合適的難題，不管它是歸納法或整體觀也好，適當地使用便行。這樣，我們便可擁有醒目 的思維了。

( Note : Please see my other blog entry about - " The Three World We Experience " here :- http://jkhcforum.blogspot.com/2011/03/thoughts-to-you-from-yours-truly-61.html )
（ 有關我們體驗的三個不同世界和適用的分析原則，請參考我這BLOG 部落格:- http://jkhcforum.blogspot.com/2011/03/thoughts-to-you-from-yours-truly-61.html )



JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 62 ) - March, 5, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 62 ) - Necessary, Sufficient & Final Conditions ( 必須，足夠和最後條件 ) - March 5, 2011

To achieve anything there are prerequisites or preconditions to be met before success can be assured. Formal logic calls these necessary and sufficient conditions. We encounter these on a daily basis without consciously acknowledging them. They are sometimes incorrectly or inappropriately used by us in our reasoning process. While both necessary and sufficient conditions are normally present to ensure success the existence of just the sufficient condition alone will also serve the purpose. On the other hand, the presence of only the necessary condition without a sufficient one is not good enough to achieve success on its own.
要一件事肯定成功，通常需要一些先決條件。正規邏輯叫這些條件為必須和足夠條件。我們在日常都隨時遇見它們，但多數只是潛意識地接受了其存在。甚至有時會 錯誤地使用了它們。通常要一件事成功，兩種條件都要具備，但只要單一的足夠條件存在，事情也可以成功的。相反來說，單有必須條件，事情便不一定會成事了。

For example, we usually praise successful people in business by complimenting them on their hard work. So much so that we simply conclude that the sole reason for their success is their diligence. However, hard work alone is not enough to ensure success as can be seen from the fact that there are many hard working but poor people. Thus, we say that hard work is only a necessary condition for success but the sufficient condition is a prevailing favourable economic condition in society at the right time or simply luck. We must distinguish between necessary and sufficient conditions in order to avoid falling victim to wrong reasoning. Never treat a necessary condition as if it were a sufficient condition or vice versa.
比例說，我們經常稱讚事業成功人士，多是努力的成果。其實，單靠努力是不足夠的。因為我們可以看見，有很多勤力但卻貧窮的人。因此，我們說勤勞只是成功的必須條件，要有一個良好的經濟環境，才可以做就成功的。由此可見，一些運氣是不可少的。我們應該小心分辨必須和足夠條件，以免犯了思維上的錯誤。


Furthermore, the necessary condition can be dispensed with on the path to success so long as the sufficient condition is present. For example, it is necessary to work hard to become rich but if you have luck ( such as having rich parents ) which is the sufficient condition you can still be rich without working hard although it is rare. Finally, there is always a slight chance for things to go wrong even in a given favourable environment. For example, you have thoroughly prepared for an examination and all goes well on your way to the examination hall. Most unfortunately, you suddenly develop stomach trouble which adversely affects your examination performance. This is the famous Uncertainty Principle in quantum mechanics which usually affects entities of subatomic size but in rare cases it can also manifest itself in the macro world especially in the form of weird accidents. We call this Murphy's Law which says that everything that can go wrong will go wrong. This is a pessimistic or cautious view of the world depending on how you look at it. Therefore, yours truly have added an extra condition to the generally accepted necessary and sufficient conditions for success and call it the Final Condition ( or technically called the absence of unfavourable quantum disposition ). Let us all be smart thinkers.
除此之外，我們應理解到，在往成功的路上，只要有足夠條件，便可把必須條件，置之不理。拿個例子， 你必須努力才可富有，但是如果你幸運，有富有的父母，你便擁有足夠條件，不用努力也自然成為富翁了。這當然是比較罕見的事。最後，就算在一個十分良好的環境下，仍然會出亂子的。比如，你十分充分地準備了應付考試，往試場途中一切順利，十分不幸地，你在考 試過程中拉肚子，大大影響了你的表現。這種情況，就是著名的量子力學上所謂無常原則（ Uncertainty Principle ), 通常只會影響小於原子大小的事物，但間中也會發生於相對較大的事物，多數會在古怪的意外中觀察得到。這些不幸事情，我們亦稱之為梅菲定律（ Murphy's Law ），它是說:「 一切最壞的情況，都會不幸地成為現實。」這是對現實的一種悲觀或小心的看法。因此，在下便稱之為最後條件 （ 或叫作良好的量子力學條件 ）。將它加於必須和足夠條件之上，以令我們的分析和預測能力加強。這樣會使我們有更醒目的思維。


JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 61 ) - March, 2, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 61 ) - The Three Worlds We Experience ( 我們體驗的三個世界 ) - March, 2, 2011

In his giant book of some 1,200 pages called " The Road to Reality - A Complete Guide to the Laws of the Universe ", famous Oxford theoretical and mathematical physicist Sir Roger Penrose made an observation that we actually live in three worlds all linked together through our consciousness. These three worlds are the " physical world " which obeys the invariant scientific laws of nature ; our complicated " mental world " of thoughts and ideas which follows complex rules and the perfect world of mathematics which follows pure logic and can very aptly describe our physical world. Furthermore, it seems that the physical world is governed or controlled by the mathematical world through mathematical rules. In turn, the mathematical world seems to be created or invented by our own mentality whereas our mental world is again governed by the invariant laws of nature of the physical world via our physiology such as our brain and other biological systems ( nervous, respiratory, digestive, circulatory systems, etc. )
著名的英國數學物理學家潘路斯爵士， 在他的一千二百頁巨著，「往現實的路」一書中，觀察到我們實際上是活在三個不同的世界中。而且這三者又由我們的意識連貫起來。這 三個世界便是，由不變易的大自然定律所控制的實際世界，神秘 錯綜複雜的思想世界，和由純邏輯主宰的完美數學世界組成。最後者更加能巧妙地和合適地描述現實的自然世界。除此之外，作者更發現到現實世界是由數學世界的 規則控制的。而數學世界卻由我們的思想世界所發明和操縱。繼之，我們的思想世界又由現實自然世界的系統 （ 如神經，消化，呼吸和循環等系統）所支配的。這就完成了數學規則控制實際自然世界操作。實際世界通過生理系統啟動我們的思想世界。我們的思想進一步創造和 發現數學規則，構成這一個單向的大循環了。

To be aware of which world we are dealing with is important insofar as we must apply the appropriate rules ( i.e. invariant scientific laws for the physical world, complex chaotic rules for our mental world and pure logic for the mathematical world ) to achieve maximum understanding and top efficiency in terms of our efforts and relative disposition.
要明白我們正在處理那個世界的問題，這是重要的事。因為不同的世界是服從不同的規則的，所以要把它們分辨出來，才可明白如何處理。實際世界要用不變易的科學定律，思想世界要用複雜的心理規條，而數學世界則要用純邏輯思維處理，便事半功倍了。

JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 60 ) - March, 1, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 60 ) - Language, Truth & Logic ( 語言，真理與邏輯 ) - March, 1, 2011

The brilliant British philosopher Sir Alfred J. Ayer ( who advocates logical positivism ) once created a very simple approach to classifying the nature of all our statements into just two main categories. The first type concerns " expression of ideas " that do not relate to our real life experience. These are called " analytical statements ". They deal with logic ( including mathematical logic ) and rationale and, therefore, concern " relations of ideas " that are abstracted from the real world. The second type concerns " matters of fact " which Ayer called " empirical statements ". The latter type can be proved or disproved through our observational evidence. For example, the statement - the sun rises in the east - is an empirical statement. On the other hand, the statement - one plus one equals two - is an analytical statement that can only be proven right or wrong through logic ( in this case, mathematical logic ) but not through empirical facts. One further word of caution on " analytical statements " must be mentioned here. The basic assumptions behind " analytical statements " must be known before we can decide on their validity. In the last example, we have already implied that we are using the normal scale of 10 as our basis because if we were using the binary ( 2 ) scale one plus one will equal 10.
超卓的英國哲學家A.J. Ayer ( 埃雅 ），曾開創先河， 把我們所有言論，分為兩大類。第一類是有關主意和概念的言論，他稱之為純分析性的言論，是與現實無直接關係的， 只關乎邏輯和推理，是主意與概念之間的關係。第二類，是關乎現實的言論，他稱之為關乎事實的言論。這類言論可以用事實去證明其真偽。例如，太陽是從東方升起的。相反，一加一等於二，這是純分析性的言論，只可從邏輯 （ 數學邏輯 ）和推理證明其真偽。在這裡，我必須指出一點，有關純分析性的言論，我們要先弄清楚相關的明顯或背面的假定，才可正確判斷其真偽。以上述為例，我們已暗示使用十進制度，假若是二進制，一加一便等於十了。


Very often, we argue on crossed purposes because we fail to distinguish between the two types of statements thus applying the wrong reasoning method. Also, we may not have defined the terms we use properly or their underlying or implicit assumptions for that matter. The simple guide lines to avoid mixed up thinking or unnecessary arguments are two fold. Firstly, distinguish between the two types of statement. Secondly, apply the correct method of verifying them. That is to say applying the relevant facts to verify the truth or falsehood of " empirical statements " while applying the relevant logic to " analytical statements " after ascertaining all explicit and implicit assumptions. This will make us smart thinkers and a modern global citizen.
我們經常被捲入一些不必要的爭辯，多數是因為不能分辨二者，所以可能用了錯誤的分析方法。也許我們未清楚說明所用名詞或暗示式假設，引起無謂之爭論。其實 運用些簡單指引，便可化解問題。這些指引分為兩個層次，第一是把兩種言論分辨出來。第二是用相關的分析方法證明其真偽。前者用事實加以驗證，後者便用相關 邏輯推理，以定真假。這樣，我們便可以擁有醒目的思維，配為一個現代世界公民。

JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 59 ) - Feb., 27, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 59 ) - Static and Dynamic Thinking ( 靜態和動態思維 ) - Feb., 27, 2011

Analyzing facts and figures is part and parcel of our daily thinking process. To think smart which is a prerequisite for a modern global citizen we must know something about these two terms. Static means seeing the facts as they stand and dynamic means anticipating the impact of related factors on those facts. Also, static implies seeing the situation as a picture at a single moment while dynamic requires the realizing the relevant trend by projecting into the future. Most of our daily analysis proves to be less effective in terms of predictive power and efficiency because they are static rather than dynamic.
分析事實和統計數據，是我們日常思考的一部分。作為現代世界世公民，我們必須擁有醒目的思維，如要這樣，我們需要了解靜態和動態的思維的分別。靜態是表示 以事實的表面意義和單方面加以分析， 動態思維就是考慮和預計其他相關因素在內。再者，靜態亦表示只看某一定點時間的情形，動態卻要估計和預測將來走勢及動向，作全面評估。我們通常對事物的分 析，多缺乏可靠和準確預測，主要是因為它們多是靜態的分析和考慮。


All statistics are by nature historical facts. Reliance on history normally gives a fair prediction of future events if and only if past circumstances hold true till the projected future point in time. Furthermore, statistics are not precise description of reality. Take this for example, an average middle aged American as the statistics say has an average annual income of US$65,000, 2.5 cars and 1.2 children. Obviously, no one can have 2.5 cars and 1.2 children. Therefore, blindly using statistics will reduce us to mechanical robots.
所有統計數據，都是歷史塵蹟。倚賴它們去預測未來，必須有賴於舊事或過往因素的有效性，才有機會作出正確的預測和分析。例如，統計數字顯示，一個普通的美 國中年人，平均年薪為＄65000美元，擁有2.5部汽車和1.2個子女。明顯地，沒有人會能擁有2.5部汽車和1.2個子女的。明顯地，沒有人會可能擁有 2.5部汽車和1.2個子女的。盲目地跟隨數字，只會令人變成機械人，不能變通。


To give you a more tangible example of dynamic analysis or planning, I will cite my own experience in my past voluntary work in China. During 2002 or thereabout my friends and I operated some sort of cooperative arrangement in northern Guangdong besides teaching the children English. We donated some money to set up a fund to make $1,000 interest free loans to farmers to raise chickens to supplement their income. They must repay the loan within a fixed period and the fund will continue to assist other farmers in the same way. Statistics show that the majority are self sufficient in food but so short of cash that their children cannot afford to pay for bus fares to attend classes. Many have to walk 4 hours on a round trip to and from school daily. Rather than handing out charity which is a passive and static way of assistance we decided to take a more dynamic approach to invite their participation in their own financial assistance. This will also give them the dignity of self help as well. So, everyone is happy and proud. Therefore, it is always wiser to think in a dynamic rather than a static manner.
再次以一個確實的例子和本人的體驗，以作說明。在2002年間，我和朋友在中國廣東北部山區，進行一些志願教育工作，給貧困學生教授英文，其間也做些扶貧 工作。照數據顯示，多數農民衣食自足，但現金短缺，引至學童要每天花四小時步行上學。我們便捐款成立基金，貸款為數$1000, 給與貧窮戶，作為養雞幫助家計，並定時償還，再次幫助其他人，令他們自力更生。這樣一來，我們便不只被動和消極地施捨他人，更加顧及他們的自尊，皆大歡 喜。這便是考慮其他因素和效益，動態的思維和分析了。


JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 58 ) - Feb., 25, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 58 ) - Micro and Macro View ( 微觀與宏觀 ) - Feb., 25, 2011

To be a smart thinker we must avoid all fatal pitfalls in our reasoning process. Normally, one plus one equals two. However, there are exceptions to the rule. The difference between micro and macro situations is a case in point. Micro view generally refers to the individual unit's perspective while macro means from the point of view of the whole environment or group like society at large. For example, psychology is the study of individual behaviour and sociology concerns behaviours as a group. Similarly, microeconomics is the study of behaviour of an individual economic entity and macroeconomics concerns the working of the whole economy.
要有醒目的思維，我們必須避免思想上的誤差。在普通情況，一加一是會等於二，但是也有例外的情況。微觀與宏觀的不同角度，便是屬於這種例外了。微觀是指以個人單位的看法，而宏觀就是以整體或者社會的角度看事物。例如，心理學是有關個人行為思想。而社會學就是群體或社會性的行為和反應。同樣地，微觀經濟是有關經濟個體的行為和反應，宏觀經濟是關乎整體或整個社會的研究。


There is a well known phenomenon in economics called the " paradox of thrift ". On the individual level, the more a person saves the richer he or she becomes. On the contrary, if society as a whole decreases its total spending the whole economy becomes poorer due to the multiplier effect. As you save $100 from your usual weekend dining the restaurant in question loses $100 business. If more people are doing just that the restaurant owner will have to reduce the number of staff and related food supply. The sagged staff will in turn have to reduce their spending due to their job loss by cutting say, their usual weekend movie. As more unemployed people do that the theatre may have to close down creating more unemployed people who must again reduce their usual spending in turn. So, the initial reduction of your $100 can add up to $100 plus the reduced spending of the sagged restaurant workers plus that of the unemployed theatre staff and so on. This is the negative multiplier effect. To prevent this disastrous scenario from happening, the government must increase public spending in infrastructure construction or use tax reduction to prop up consumption ( fiscal measures ) or reduce interest rates to encourage more private consumption ( monetary measures ) to avoid an economic recession.
在經濟學上，有一個出名的現象，名叫「節約的反效果」。在微觀層面，一個人儲蓄越多，個人便越富有。相反地，在社會層面，如果總消費減少，便會產生倍數的經 濟收縮。原因是這樣的，當你少花費$100去吃一個週末晚餐時， 餐館便失去$100生意，多了人節約，餐館老闆可能要裁員。失業的人或者要節省而不再看週末電影，這樣一來，戲院老闆又要裁員自保。這樣一來，整個社會便 損失了不止原本的$100,並且加上餐館和戲院失業員工的減少花費，形成惡性循環，消費倍數減少。要避免這種損害，政府必須增加公共開支 （ 財政措施），或者以減少稅收來刺激經濟增長。減低利息 （ 金融措施），也可以刺激消費。


The lesson to be learned here is that more is different due to complex human behaviour and interaction. Therefore, things must not be viewed in isolation but must be put in the proper perspective of the whole situation. One citizen throwing one piece of rubbish is not a big problem ( micro view ) but everyone doing that will cost society billions of dollars disposing of rubbish ( the macro view ). Thus, we must think smart as modern global citizens.
從以上例子，我們可以得到以下教訓，就是多了互動單位和因素，結果完全會與單一因素不同。因此，分析事物必須整體和全面作考慮。一個人拋一點垃圾不成大問 題（ 微觀看法），每一個人都是垃圾蟲，便要社會支付數以千萬的費用來處理了（ 宏觀看法）。因此，作為今天的世界公民，我們必須擁有醒目的思維。


JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 57 ) - Feb., 19, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 57 ) - Selection Effect ( 選擇效應 ) - Feb., 19, 2011

Selection effect is the single most powerful factor that shapes our behaviour and human society at large. It is so overpowering and yet extremely subtle that we are influenced by it without our conscious knowledge. A simple example will illustrate my point. The most generally accepted idea in human society is the mystical concept of destiny ( although a small percentage of the population like yours truly do not abide by it ). I respectfully submit that this is the result of the selection effect. Say, a teenage girl meets a boy to whom she is instantly attracted in a subway train one day while getting to work. Let us say they strike up a conversation and become friends thus starting a romance. More likely than not, the girl will be completely convinced that destiny has a hand in their chanced meeting. What about other passengers on the same train ? Are they not equally arranged by destiny to be there with the girl ? Why doesn't the girl feel that destiny has also tied her to the other people on the train ? The short answer is that she chooses to like her boy. She has, in fact, " chosen her own destiny ". That is the subconscious working of the selection effect or the exercise of her free will. I am not against believing in destiny despite my own rejection of the concept but I am suggesting that there could be other factors at work. Blindly following the destiny concept could possibly result in self fulfilling prophecies or degenerate into superstition that could be harmful.

Besides the example of destiny, there are other harmful phenomena such as double standards, prejudice, extremism and numerous other human shortcomings that have to do with seeing things only from one's own perspective. They are all mainly the result of the selection effect. To avoid falling victim to this devastatingly harmful selection effect, it is advisable to look at things from different angles and not just from your own point of view.

選擇效應，是影響我們行為最強的單一因素。它甚至會影響整個社會的動向。它是十分強有力和極端含蓄的力量，令我們暗地裏受它影響而不自知。我可以用一個簡 單的例子加以說明。在人類社會中，最廣泛被接受的玄妙概念，就是有命運存在的說法（ 雖然有少部份人，包括本人在內, 不相信命運）。我沒有存心不敬地認為，命運之說，是選擇效應的結果。比例說，某天有一位少女，在上班時，在地鐵上和她一位鍾情的少年相遇。兩人互相傾慕而 交談起來，於是一段戀情便展開。在那位少女的角度看，她大多數都會認為是命運的安排。那麼她和其他同車的乘客，又是否有命運安排呢？為什麼她不會以命運之 說，來形容其他乘客呀！其實，她是對那位少年，作了她的個人選擇，認定了他是生命的一部分，亦即是說，那位女孩自己選擇了這般命運，不是命運安排她的生 命, 這是她自由意志的發揮才對。我並不反對別人相信命運，只不過認為有其他因素，推動所為命運之說。盲目地迷信命運，可能會導致有害的自行成真預言，那便十分 不幸了。

除了以上有關命運的例子，另外選擇效應的壞效果實在數不清，它們包括雙重標準，各色各樣的偏見，極端主義等，不勝枚舉。它們都是因為以自己和單一的角度看事物 所做成的惡果。而且都是由選擇效應所導致的。為避免受到它的禍害，我們必須從多方面分析事物，不要坐井觀天，卻要推己及人，便可享受海闊天空。

JKHC ( 鄭冠合 )

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 56 ) - Feb., 17, 2011

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 56 ) - The Fallacy of Assumed Mutual Exclusivity ( 假定互相排斥的謬誤 ) - Feb., 17, 2011

This is a very common fallacy that affects most of our decisions. Ever so often we find ourselves opposing a proposal, say to allocate a portion of the public budget to the welfare of animals on the ground that we still have many poor citizens that need attention. Behind all such seemingly reasonable arguments there is the implicit assumption that the choices in question are mutually exclusive. This is called the fallacy of assumed mutual exclusivity meaning that we can only have one without the other or that things are all mutually exclusive when we are faced with a choice. This fallacy can lead to excuses that justify inaction while we are morally obligated to do something in the face of injustice. For example, we may feel that we are excused from helping others when we still have some unsolved problems of our own or that we need not help those worse off than us when we are not well off ourselves. This cannot be farther from the truth. It is just an excuse to dodge our moral responsibilities. Next time when we are faced with a choice beware of this very common fallacy that can lead us to wrong conclusions or the shunning of our moral responsibilities.

這是一種十分常見的思維謬誤。我們時常作出類似的決定，例如反對以公帑來改善動物福利。原因在認為仍然有很多貧困的公民需要照顧。在類似的決定後面，都包 含着假定兩者是不能共存的。即是說，我們假定只能在這兩個目標中二選其一。這樣的思維會給我們藉口去逃避道德上的責任，不去申張正義。比如，我們可能會認 為，未解決自己所有個人問題前，便沒有幫助其他人的責任。又或者，在自己未成為富翁前，不用幫助比較貧困的人。其實，這是離開真理十分遠的看法。這只會成 為令我們逃避道德責任的藉口吧了。下次我們要作出抉擇時，請小心提防和避免犯了這種謬誤。

JKHC

Thoughts to you from yours truly - ( 51 ) - November 27, 2010

Thoughts to You from Yours Truly - ( TYYT ) - ( 51 ) - Misnomer ( 錯配詞 ) - Nov., 27, 2010

There are many words in the human language that have been grossly misused. Most of them have wrong meanings arbitrarily imprinted on them. Let me show you what I mean.

Logic is always treated as good but, in fact, it is neutral in meaning. Logic simply means being self consistent with no implication with respect to value judgment. For example, the question of how to ration water during extreme shortage in a desert expedition is an interesting proposition. Economic logic relating to efficient distribution of scarce resources will say that it should follow the law of supply and demand. The richest guy gets it for the highest price in auction while everybody else will perish. That is obviously inhumane and a heartless approach. Following things to their logical conclusion may not be good at all because logic is not meant to be good but merely a rule to make our thinking self consistent.

Another notorious wrong usage of words can be found in the use the term quantum leap to describe progress in their policies by politicians. As a matter of fact, quantum is the smallest possible jump in the energy level of an excited atom. It only sounds big and mystical and mainly because of this politicians use it to entice the voters to put them in power.

Other words such as equilibrium, efficiency, stability and the like are usually treated as positive words whereas they are neutral by themselves. Whether they are good or bad depends entirely on the context in which they are used. For example, a sub-optimal equilibrium in the economy would be bad. Being efficient in exterminating people like the evil Nazis in WWII is revolting. The next time when we use such words think twice before assuming that they are all positive in meaning. We must think smart.

在人類的言語和文字中，有很多字或名詞是被錯誤用的。它們被人們強行加上了些錯誤的意思。讓我為你們解釋一下。

邏 輯一辭，經常是被人當作是正面的意思。其實，邏輯本身是中性的，沒有好也沒有壞意思。它只是表示一樣東西沒有自相矛盾吧了， 並無正面或反面的含意。作個比喻，當在沙漠中不足夠水去分配時，應該如何處理？依照有效分配資源的經濟理論，就是以價高者得的原則去處理。最富有的人便可 以得到食水，而其他的人都會給渴死了。這顯然是沒有人性的做法。一承不變地去追求邏輯，並非一件好事。因為，邏輯只是用來確保一件事情，不會自相矛盾吧 了。

另外一個錯誤用辭的例子，便是政客常用的quantum leap或量子級跳。他們用作非常大的進展那個意思。其實quantum leap是最低限度的能量升級，與他們的用意剛好相反。只因為這名詞有神秘感和動聽，政客們便拿來吸引選民，希望自己取得權力吧了。

其他如平衡，效率，穩定等名詞，皆是類似的辭語，本身是中性的，視乎應用的來龍去脈，才可定其性質。但在日常應用時都被用作正面性一般。比如，經濟平衡在 一個不適當的水平便不是好事。或者，如二次大戰時，德國納粹黨有效率地殺滅猶太人，這便是嘔心的惡行，絕無正面意義。所以，下次我們用詞，必須三思而行，才 可用之得宜。我們應該擁有醒目的思維才是上算。

JKHC.