Skip to main content

Theory and Conclusion

 

What are the differences between theory and conclusion?

At first blush, this seems a simple question.  But not quite. Eventually some conclusions fail, but theories do as well.  

A theory is a “framework” to explain certain phenomena. It contains premises or axioms, and basic conclusions about what may be true, what may happen, and the like. Conclusions are basically what follows from the basic theory. When accepted, they become a part of the theory. Therefore, the theory evolves and grows. Examples include all the sciences, math, and even psychology.

It can happen there become multiple theories that begin with assumptions but diverge into different theories. These include sociology, economics, and even psychology.

Unstated here is just how conclusions are formed. In sciences, there are experiments, observations, and derivations. However, in religion, there are these but also revelations to be accepted upon belief. In advanced science, constructs are formed for which no experiments or observations can be made, but remarkably observable predictions are made. Example, M-theory, theory of everything.

Unstated as well, is the logic allowed in drawing conclusions. Logic itself evolves. For example, theorems in mathematics formerly considered as correct have required modification and/or correction. Ditto for the other sciences.

It is best to think of theory and conclusions as organic, emerging and evolving as other theories emerge and evolve. Sorry, there are no absolutes anywhere in this story, as much as we want them.

Example. Consider the simple bacterium. It began before Pasteur as a theoretical possibility, replacing malaise theories. Then a theory emerged. Insufficient to explain all diseases, the virus was discovered, and the theory was expanded. Only three-four decades ago, the prion was hypothesized and it explained diseases neither bacteria nor viruses could explain, such as mad cow disease. So, it is natural to ask, what might be discovered next? Every discovery is posited as the end of the story, but turns out to be the beginning of a new story with theories, conclusions, and then eventual failure.

On another note, even now black holes have been shown to “leak.” How to explain this? Yes, there are theories evolving - not yet final. On yet another note, theories of time and whether it has a direction seem always to be in a formative stage.

Think of it this way.  You’ve heard of the stone age, the bronze age, the iron age, the industrial age, and more.  You’ve heard of the information age, and think we’re here. In fact, we are in the age of theories, where you must have a theory to get into any game.  And theories are easy to produce, but many don’t stick. 

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Accepting Fake Information

Every day, we are all bombarded with information, especially on news channels.  One group claims it's false; another calls it the truth. How can we know when to accept it or alternatively how can we know it's false? There are several factors which influence acceptance of fake or false information. Here are the big four.  Some just don’t have the knowledge to discern fact/truth from fiction/fact/false*. Some fake information is cleverly disguised and simply appears to be correct. Some fake information is accepted because the person wants to believe it. Some fake information is accepted because there is no other information to the contrary. However, the acceptance of  information  of any kind become a kind of  truth , and this is a well studied topic. In the link below is an essay on “The Truth About Truth.” This shows simply that what is your point of view, different types of information are generally accepted, fake or not.   https://www.linkedin.com/posts/g-donald-allen-420b03

Your Brain Within Your Brain

  Your Bicameral Brain by Don Allen Have you ever gone to another room to get something, but when you got there you forgot what you were after? Have you ever experienced a flash of insight, but when you went to look it up online, you couldn’t even remember the keyword? You think you forgot it completely. How can it happen so fast? You worry your memory is failing. Are you merely absent-minded? You try to be amused. But maybe you didn’t forget.   Just maybe that flash of insight, clear and present for an instant, was never given in the verbal form, but another type of intelligence you possess, that you use, and that communicates only to you. We are trained to live in a verbal world, where words matter most. Aside from emotions, we are unable to conjure up other, nonverbal, forms of intelligence we primitively, pre-verbally, possess but don’t know how to use. Alas, we live in a world of words, stewing in the alphabet, sleeping under pages of paragraphs, almost ignoring one of

Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious?

  Is Artificial Intelligence Conscious? I truly like the study of consciousness, though it is safe to say no one really knows what it is. Some philosophers has avoided the problem by claiming consciousness simply doesn’t exist. It's the ultimate escape clause. However, the "therefore, it does not exist" argument also applies to "truth", "God", and even "reality" all quite beyond a consensus description for at least three millennia. For each issue or problem defying description or understanding, simply escape the problem by claiming it doesn’t exist. Problem solved or problem avoided? Alternately, as Daniel Dennett explains consciousness as an account of the various calculations occurring in the brain at close to the same time. However, he goes on to say that consciousness is so insignificant, especially compared to our exalted notions of it, that it might as well not exist [1] . Oh, well. Getting back to consciousness, most of us have view