Jiva

MIND, MATTER AND GOD : JIVA, JADA AND ISVARA
M.M.NINAN
This is a deliberately simplistic example, but it lays bare what the first step in the scientific
method, commonly understood, really amounts to: one makes observations, and forms an
inductive hypothesis. The next step, of course, is experimentation to confirm or refute the
hypothesis—and it is here that the trouble occurs. In a case like this, experimentation amounts
to observing as many ravens as possible, and confirming that they are all black. Now it is
impossible, even in principle, to observe every raven, for many no longer exist, many do not yet
exist, and it is conceivable that there are creatures one would also wish to call ravens that exist
in inaccessible places, such as other planets. There are always limits to an experimental
apparatus, even if the apparatus is just a matter of observing as many ravens as possible to
check their color. Nonetheless, we feel justified in saying that each new observation of a black
raven tends to confirm the hypothesis, and in time, if no green or blue or otherwise non-black
ravens are observed, our hypothesis will eventually come to have the status of a natural law.
But is this logical? Note that, logically put, our hypothesis “all ravens are black” has the form
of a conditional, that is, a statement of the form “if A then B.” In short, we are saying that if a
given object is a raven, then that object is black. According to the laws of logic, a conditional is
equivalent to its contrapositive. That is, a statement of the form “if A then B” is equivalent to the
statement “if not B then not A.” For example, the statement “if I live in Denver then I live in
Colorado” is logically equivalent to the statement “if I do not live in Colorado then I do not live in
Denver.” This rule of logic is incontrovertible.
Non-Black Non-Raven
Our hypothesis “all ravens are black” therefore has the equivalent form “all non-black things are
non-ravens,” or more precisely, “if an object isn't black then it is not a raven.” Consequently, if
every sighting of a black raven confirms our hypothesis, then every sighting of a non-black nonraven
equally confirms our hypothesis.
I look at my shirt. It's blue. And it is not a raven. Confirmation! My hypothesis that all ravens
are black is strengthened! My coffee cup is red. More confirmation. The grass is green, the sky
is blue, my computer is gray, my dog is white—all confirming the hypothesis “all ravens are
black.”
Silly, isn't it? (Isn't it?) But by the laws of logic, if I accept inductive hypotheses and
confirmation by experiment, then every observation except one that refutes my hypothesis—
confirms it. Even if it is totally irrelevant.
http://platonicrealms.com/encyclopedia/Hempels-Ravens-Paradox#1
24