Quote:
Originally Posted by Sol Falling
So what is probabilistic logic then? You take a conclusion which has an objective chance of being true...and then you make further extrapolations based off of it.
My statement that Medaka and Zenkichi's relationship in its present form is over was a logical conclusion, not a conjecture. You can objectively ascertain that the basis of Medaka's attachment to Zenkichi was emotional dependency. You can objectively ascertain that Zenkichi grew out of the devotion which enabled it. You can objectively correlate this to Medaka's reaction of saying "goodbye". Thereby you can reach the logical conclusion that their relationship as it had existed for 14 years was over. All of that is stuff which is assertable, and arguable, under objective grounds.
But you yourself just admitted that it's possible to make objective conclusions.  Conclusions are based on known information, i.e. the published source material thus far. Predictions as to the future of Medaka and Zenkichi's relationship were conjecture, certainly, but the basis (i.e. the part I told you was objective) was logical conclusions based on established source material.
Do you disagree that analyzing established source material objectively is possible? |
Conlusions based on lack of evidence aren't objective that's essentially his point, they may end up ultimately correct or not but they're pretty far from being objective. It's practically impossible to have an objective conclusion that isn't completely confirm by a fact, since all conlusion will be in come way affect by a person's past experiences, beliefs and personality. It's simply a sliding scale. In the absense of evidence the most logical, objective conclusion would be acceptance of multiple scenario's personal bias will determine which scanerio each individual person favours but ultimately the lack of a stating a specific scenario as correct woud be the most objective positon