Pre-Logical Evaluation

Ideas come and go, but when you focus on one you start linking it to other bits of info and concepts, thus constructing a complex entity of interrelations; the idea itself becomes the system of relations between other ideas. Evaluating such a construct is not always easy, and usually the complexity of the evaluation process is of a higher order than that of the idea. While I do not want to go into detail about the nature of the evaluation process, I wish to forward a type of evaluating criteria: introspection. 

Not all ideas, or arguments, can be scrutinized through the rules of logic; there will always be that very human step over the calculable dimension of “if then”. What I’m talking about is the mind’s unique ability to understand and comprehend, a process resulting in a sum that is larger than its parts. There will always be a line of reasoning, but sometimes how you get from one step to the other is not always clear. Until this day we do not know exactly how the mind works. But you can introspect into the workings of your own mind. 

Whatever conscious process you use to arrive at a conclusion, or construct an idea, it is possible to trace it, and get a feeling of your own system of reasoning. Of course, the system is not always stable; if at all, only relatively. But when you get somewhat of a good grasp of it, you can then scrutinize and evaluate it. The underlying idea is that if you detect an error in the way your mind works to reason out something, then you can assume that your conclusion might be wrong. It is not always easy to do the above, but it’s possible, and can prove to be an invaluable tool. I personally prefer to use this sort of approach pre logical evaluation, by that I mean before I start using formal logical tools, the ifs and thens, to evaluate the structure of an argument.