The Way We Think: Step Reasoning and Stage Reasoning
Nonfiction, Religion & Spirituality, Philosophy
| Author: | Geoffrey Tingate | ISBN: | 9781925353259 |
| Publisher: | MoshPit Publishing | Publication: | October 11, 2015 |
| Imprint: | Smashwords Edition | Language: | English |
| Author: | Geoffrey Tingate |
| ISBN: | 9781925353259 |
| Publisher: | MoshPit Publishing |
| Publication: | October 11, 2015 |
| Imprint: | Smashwords Edition |
| Language: | English |
By and large human reasoning proceeds in short steps restricted almost entirely to the surface, thereby falling short of what is called for in the modern world. In contrast, the reasoning of a rare minority proceeds in immensely more powerful stages. Included in this minority are those whose inductive stage reasoning enables them to probe far beneath the surface and reveal Nature’s most hidden secrets – the fundamental principles behind her many and varied surface manifestations.
Step reasoning and inductive stage reasoning are so much at odds with one another that few are able to come to terms with a principle when it is first made known to them. Understanding will continue to elude those who are unwilling or unable to undergo a course of instruction devised specifically for their enlightenment.
Inductive stage reasoning has gone from strength to strength for many centuries, and courses of instruction have proliferated accordingly. The high standard of such courses has made it possible for principles and associated sound practices to be impressed on ever-increasing numbers of students, even where most of them are inherently limited to step reasoning.
Despite this success, human affairs continue to be determined by superficial step reasoning, and imperilled by the apparently unstoppable forces of unenlightenment. Countless attempts have been made to bring about the necessary reforms but all have come to nought thus far. One reason is that all such attempts have fallen short of the standard which has long been the case with inductive teachings. Another reason is that two requirements have never been met.
The first requirement is to bring about a universal appreciation of the validity and scope of inductive stage reasoning, and the shortcomings and limitations of step reasoning.
The second is to raise the standard of all teaching to comply with the validity and completeness of inductive teachings.
By and large human reasoning proceeds in short steps restricted almost entirely to the surface, thereby falling short of what is called for in the modern world. In contrast, the reasoning of a rare minority proceeds in immensely more powerful stages. Included in this minority are those whose inductive stage reasoning enables them to probe far beneath the surface and reveal Nature’s most hidden secrets – the fundamental principles behind her many and varied surface manifestations.
Step reasoning and inductive stage reasoning are so much at odds with one another that few are able to come to terms with a principle when it is first made known to them. Understanding will continue to elude those who are unwilling or unable to undergo a course of instruction devised specifically for their enlightenment.
Inductive stage reasoning has gone from strength to strength for many centuries, and courses of instruction have proliferated accordingly. The high standard of such courses has made it possible for principles and associated sound practices to be impressed on ever-increasing numbers of students, even where most of them are inherently limited to step reasoning.
Despite this success, human affairs continue to be determined by superficial step reasoning, and imperilled by the apparently unstoppable forces of unenlightenment. Countless attempts have been made to bring about the necessary reforms but all have come to nought thus far. One reason is that all such attempts have fallen short of the standard which has long been the case with inductive teachings. Another reason is that two requirements have never been met.
The first requirement is to bring about a universal appreciation of the validity and scope of inductive stage reasoning, and the shortcomings and limitations of step reasoning.
The second is to raise the standard of all teaching to comply with the validity and completeness of inductive teachings.
