1.What is reason?

Reason is a cause, action or justification for an event or action 
The power of the mind to think, understand, and form judgements logically
as stated by the Oxford Dictionaries 

2. Write definitions of deductive and inductive reasoning.

 deductive argument is an argument that is intended by the arguer to be (deductively) valid, that is, to provide a guarantee of the truth of the conclusion provided that the argument's premises (assumptions) are true. This point can be expressed also by saying that, in a deductive argument, the premises are intended to provide such strong support for the conclusion that, if the premises are true, then it would be impossible for the conclusion to be false. An argument in which the premises do succeed in guaranteeing the conclusion is called a (deductively) valid argument. If a valid argument has true premises, then the argument is said to be sound.

Here is a valid deductive argument: It's sunny in Singapore. If it's sunny in Singapore, he won't be carrying an umbrella. So, he won't be carrying an umbrella.

Here is a mildly strong inductive argument: Every time I've walked by that dog, he hasn't tried to bite me. So, the next time I walk by that dog he won't try to bite me.

An inductive argument is an argument that is intended by the arguer merely to establish or increase the probability of its conclusion. In an inductive argument, the premises are intended only to be so strong that, if they were true, then it would be unlikely that the conclusion is false. There is no standard term for a successful inductive argument. But its success or strength is a matter of degree, unlike with deductive arguments. A deductive argument is valid or else invalid.

The difference between the two kinds of arguments does not lie solely in the words used; it comes from the relationship the author or expositor of the argument takes there to be between the premises and the conclusion. If the author of the argument believes that the truth of the premisesdefinitely establishes the truth of the conclusion (due to definition, logical entailment, logical structure, or mathematical necessity), then the argument is deductive. If the author of the argument does not think that the truth of the premises definitely establishes the truth of the conclusion, but nonetheless believes that their truth provides good reason to believe the conclusion true, then the argument is inductive.

Lateral thinking is looking at a matter by taking a creative and indirectve approach, by viewing an issue in a new and and unusual light. 

The enemies of reason would be strong emotions and biases mainly. those two things affect an individual's ability to reason.

Sometime Emotional can help reason but in most cases it hinders it. If you want to look at a matter in a reasonable or logical light you should not involve your emotions because sometimes it affects one's ability to rationalize and make exact conclusions on a matter(s). Sometimes emotions works to help us imagine what we should or could do in a situation, that is where lateral thinking comes into place. It varies. If we can justify our emotions in a matter by using solid or tangible evidence then it may be alright in that case/argument. 

The Klu Klux Klan Versus the Westboro Baptist Church

I was going through my home page on one those social websites and while I was scrolling I saw something that nearly caused my eyeballs to drop out of my sockets. It was entitled 'The Klux Klan Protests Westboro Baptist Church And Their Hateful Anti-American Tactics'. I myself am not an American by birth, but this headline captured my interest regardless. Why may you ask? Two extremely right-winged (with emphasis on extremist) groups were publicly bashing each other and I would have thought they would have supported each other in rallying against the LGBTQ Community given their backward thinking. I immediately read the article and watched a supporting video link. I found the matter to be quite hilarious and contradictory. I have posted the links below to both the article and the video. The Westboro Baptist Church was protesting the entitlement of marriage rights (especially for military personnel) of the LGBTQ Community. The article also mentioned the involvement and hacking of the Westboro Baptist Church's twitter account by human rights 'hactivist' Anonymous. I am a strong believer of equality on the basis of religious beliefs (as long as they don't interfere with affairs of the state - they should be seperate), race, sexual orientation/identity and gender. So I don't extend my support to these groups. While both groups are deemed to be unethical, they have the right to express their beliefs in a non-violent manner. Members and supporters of these groups have been found to organise and carry out aggressive acts towards minorities so shouldn't they both be outlawed? Or is it not considered an unethical issue or practice? The claimed 'grand wizard' Dennis LaBonte of the Klu Klux Klan spoke out against the religious extremist group. It somewhat reminded me of when the religious extremists/ 'The Church' condemned individuals of witchcraft. This time it seems the other way around. Ethics and U.S. History would be areas of Knowledge used in examining this occurrence.



http://samuel-warde.com/2012/12/kkk-protests-westboro-church/


http://samuel-warde.com/2012/12/kkk-protests-westboro-church/

The Twin Paradox and Special Relativity - Say what?

I watched another video created by the Open University: 60-Second Adventures In Thought. I was quite intrigued but puzzled by Einstein's theories on special relativity and time presented  in the video. "The faster one travels through space, the slower they move through time?"  I do not know what to make of that statement. If a clock goes slowly it does not change the actual time, right? Maybe I'm not quite grasping Einstein's concept. So I went in search of information on the Time Paradox and Special Relativity's place in it. This is what I found. 

 In the natural science Physics, the twin paradox is a thought experiment in special relativity involving identical twins, one of whom makes a journey into outer space in a lightning speed space shuttle and returns home to find that the twin who remained on Earth has aged more. This result appears somewhat confusing because each twin sees the other twin as moving, and so, according to an incorrect naive application of time dilation and the principle of relativity, each should paradoxically find the other to have aged more slowly than before. However, this scenario can be resolved within the standard framework of special relativity: the travelling twin's trajectory involves two different inertial frames, one for the outbound journey and one for the inbound journey, and so there is no symmetry between the space-time paths of the two twins. Therefore the twin paradox is not a paradox in the sense of a logical contradiction.French physicist Paul Langevin in 1911, there have been various explanations of this paradox. These explanations "can be grouped into those that focus on the effect of different standards of simultaneity in different frames, and those that designate the acceleration [experienced by the travelling twin] as the main reason...". Max von Laue argued in 1913 that since the traveling twin must be in two separate inertial frames, one on the way out and another on the way back, this frame switch is the reason for the aging difference, not the acceleration per se. Conclusions put forth by Albert Einstein and Max Born invoked gravitational time dilation to explain the aging as a direct effect of acceleration.
The twin paradox has been verified experimentally by precise measurements of atomic clocks flown in aircraft and satellites. For example, gravitational time dilation and special relativity together have been used to explain the Hafele–Keating experiment. It was also confirmed in particle accelerators by measuring time dilation of circulating particle beams.

I am still somewhat confused, but more informed than before.



https://youtu.be/oOL2d-5-pJ8

Mathematics as a Way of Knowing

I was placed into group 1 and I picked the task of researching on the mathematical branch known as Geometry. Geometry ifrom the Ancient Greek word 'Geometron' , with geo- meaning earth and -metron meaning measurement. Geometry is the mathematical branch dealing with the theories of size, shape, the relative positions of figures and also the properties of space. It is concerned with lengths, areas and volumes of everything around us. Geometry came about in the 6th Century BCE in the west.  I see many inter-developments between the various topics in Mathematics, for one is dependent or cannot exist without the other. Such an example are trigonometry and geometry. Trigonometry branched out from geometry, it is the study of the relationship of lengths and angles in triangles, specifically and it became known in 3rd Century BCE. It was used to apply to astronomical studies. Pythagora's Theorem is also branched off from Trigonometry.The mathematical science was practiced first among the Ancient Eygptians and Far East, and both have made significant contributions to this science. These Ancient Greats if put in a room together they could communicate via mathematics and would arrive at similar accurate and precise mathematical conclusions. This shows that Mathematics can also be interconnected to Languages for it is its own language.The Chinese formed the abacus, the calculator's predecessor. This proves that Mathematics is an international area of knowledge. To this day it is widely practiced and its equations and formula's can be understood by all (who have the capacity/ knowledge to) regardless of speaking many different languages around the world. If Mathematics were a tree it would have interconnected or tangled branches; tightly interwoven. The tree would go on for infinity for math is in everything around us; it is infinite. 

Stroopwafels

In Thursday's TOK class we each were given a Stroopwafel, which is a caramel/syrup waffle comprising of two thin baked pieces of dough with a syrup, caramel or treacle filling between.
I used logical reasoning, my senses, guesswork and prior knowledge in order to figure out what this treat was. I have consumed one before a long time ago, but I did not know or remember the correct term for this baked good. In class we did not eat it immediately (well those who could control themselves- some took a nip at it). I referred to it as a wafer of some sort before Ms. Tickle informed us it was a Stroopwafel.
I closely scrutinized the Stroopwafel that I had received to ensure it was indeed a stroopwafel and to see what it was comprised of and figure out or guess how it was made. The treat was obviously made from flour dough by its texture and structure/appearance.
Learning the proper name for the baked good helped to add to my understanding of what a stroopwafel was. It originates from Gouda in the Netherlands. 'Stroop' means treacle/syrup and wafel means a waffle, similar to the sweet breakfast baked good the Americans and some others eat. wafers are made up of wafels/waffles so I was not incorrect in my claim especially since there is a creamy substance lodged between the waffles.
How did I know it was safe to eat the stroopwafel? I didn't know whether or not it would be. I trust Ms. Tickle  enough not  to give me something poisonous but how would I really know? You never know. the Stroopwafels came in a decorative and attractive box and were unopened. We all saw when Ms. Tickle opened the package. The packaging may insinuate that the Stroopwafels are safe to eat, but someone can always add something and repackage the stroopwafels if they are clever enough to. While most food companies follow strict health guidelines it is not impossible or unheard of for one to violate those safety regulations. We had a pleasant debate over the validity of the stroopwafels.

We all learned some Dutch today, a couple words from a foreign tongue/language and it somehow helped my understanding of what a stroopwafel was. Language does indeed help my understanding of what I 'know' although there are many variations/dialects of a language and this can alter each meaning of a word or phrase. that has been proven with the many translations of religious texts into the English language from Latin, Ancient Greek, Hebrew, Welsh, etcetera. Our senses help us (our brains) draw conclusions and come up with reasons and language aids this process. I really enjoyed the Socratic dialogue and thinking time in class- and of course the Stroopwafel. I don't think the exercise limited me, it broadened my horizons and made me more inquisitive and accepting. Is it ever good to limit oneself? I don't know. I don't believe in placing limits overall but I guess it depends on the situation. Yes I do believe that tweeting is a modern version of dialogue in a sense. It is a different, an unusual and modern manifestation. Words and sentences are still used to communicate and convey thoughts so yes it is. I don't mind trying something out twice so yes I would use it again.

The Human Brian

How does the pre-frontal cortex change in humans between the ages of 5 and 25?

The Pre-Frontal Cortex is the brain's remote control and it is a section of the brain that weighs outcomes/consequences, forms conclusions and controls human emotions.  It takes time for this to mature or develop fully. It also helps humans to process human interaction and social behaviour. This part of the brain takes time to fully develop and it does not usually until or around the age of 25 years, in adulthood.

How is this connected to the law, and what personal relevance does this information have to you?

Well in most countries the law states that the drinking age is 21 years of age. However in my country it is 18 years of age. Generally, I think it is because most Jamaicans like to drink and it is somewhat socially acceptable for individuals under the legal drinking age to consume alcoholic beverages. Alcohol affects and influences the human mind; it tends to disrupt rational thought, and most minds are still not developed enough to deal with the influence of alcohol. Alcohol is a drug so it affects the normal functioning of the brain. I can perceive that most would think that the human brain is well enough developed by the age of 21 in order for these 'adults' to have control over their speech and actions. I disagree because no matter what age, alcohol tends to make humans forget themselves and the consequences of their actions in such a vulnerable state. Excessive amounts also damage the 'CPU' and nervous system. Like a lot of Jamaican children, I too started drinking before the age of consent but I made a conscious decision to stop at the age of 15. I went a little overboard than most. It was difficult but now I no longer. Personally speaking, I agree that the drinking age should be moved to 21 in my country. The drinking age is no longer of any relevance to me now but I agree it should be moved up nonetheless, especially after reading this article. Teenagers should not drink. I can say so from shared knowledge and personal knowledge.

If the brain, in the dark inside our skull, is our computer, what interfaces does it have with the outside world?

The brain helps us to respond to other living organisms, consciously or not. We cannot interact with the outside world without it. It helps us to communicate our feelings an or ideologies to others
and other interactions. it helps us humans to evaluate situations and think up answers to problems quickly. Like most things in our bodies, it is connected to our nervous system and hormones which influence and affect how we relate to the outside world. We cannot function without our CPU, our brain. That would be impossible.

The Grandfather Paradox

"Will time travel ever be possible?" is one of the controversial questions/topics which has prevailed on man's mind from over a century ago. The grandfather Paradox argues that travelling back in time is impossible, however it does not state it is impossible to travel to a future time period. In 1943, Rene Barjavel, who was a French journalist and science fiction writer spent a lot of time thinking about the possibility of time travel,  and came up with this theory. In his book Le Voyageur Imprudent the main argument presented  was imagine that you build a time machine. It is possible for you to travel back in time, meet your grandfather before he produces any children (i.e. your father/mother) and kill him. Thus, you would not have been born and the time machine would not have been built, therefore, a paradox. One of your parents would not have been born so therefore you would never had existed. Another time travel paradox is Robert Heinlein's classic short story All You Zombies. Doesn't Time travel defy the laws of physics? In the space of matter and time how could it be possible? This theory has several gaps in it, but it could be accurate, maybe. There is no evidence that time travel is or isn't possible, but why should we try to alter what is meant to be or rather change what helped to shape and influence our present and future? Couldn't that have serious consequences?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Y6RjjaEy59I

References:

http://abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/glossary/grandfather_paradox.html

http://www.princeton.edu/~achaney/tmve/wiki100k/docs/Grandfather_paradox.html