Lack of spatial visualization of the cube cutting
Absence of mental imaging of the first derivative of velocity
The extremely common inverting of implication relationships
Those are the four "irrationality" auras under the house.
Even if there are correlations among them, they constitute a space of many dimensions. We all differ in our auras, in our abilities to perceive abstract relationships of various kinds. We all come up against our personal "edges of human comprehension," also an entity of a space of many dimensions. How can we recognize when a disagreement is a difference in pattern recognition in these multidimensioned spaces? And when personal taste and preference is free from such differences?
We recently witnessed a truly horrific set of inverted implications with:
The attack of 9/11 was evil.
Many who easily recognize the logical absurdity of this "reasoning" nevertheless believe its conclusion. (Or do they? If they do, what evidence and reasoning are they following?) However, a majority of the American public apparently did accept that reasoning--and the opinion shapers (Carl Rove leading?) presented it with confidence of its effectiveness.
It was effective.
We have a problem.
The problem is rooted in reasoning.
One of the salient dimensions of the problem
is mutual reciprocity.
We need a "bridge