8.0.2.1 Reasonable Alternative Conclusions

Version 1.1 August 2014                               (Previous Version)

These global beliefs allow for various alternative conclusions and differences in judgements.  If reason and the available evidence don't lead to a single conclusion, on a particular matter, then to be reasonable we must continue to entertain all those alternatives.  We consider these alternatives in detail in Parts 1 to 7, but here in Part 8 we need to see in perspective how they impact on our vision of a reasonable global way.

Science especially seems to change rapidly, and it can seem bewildering. 

●  We need to remember that the fundamental theories of current science have been around for over 100 years: the theory of evolution, the general theory of relativity and quantum theory.  These theories are being continually validated by the evidence, even though they raise questions. 

●  We know the theory of relativity and quantum theory don't explain everything in physics, but we know they explain most events at very big and very small scales very well.  The theory of evolution is continually being filled out with advances in genetics and biochemistry.

Theories in history are much more fluid. 

●  As explained in Part 3 (History), Keynes’ theory of employment, interest and money, devised over 70 years ago, is still useful today, and essentially explains how a country like Australia survived the Global Financial Crisis of 2008 without a recession.  But Keynes’ theory didn’t handle the period of stagflation of the 1970s, so we know it is incomplete.

Theories in religion are too complex to consider in detail here.  There are theories of art that seem to come and go, often based on inadequate understandings of science, history and religion.

We now understand that theories in science and history evolve.  No theories are complete and fully explain everything.  People discover flaws and omissions and inconsistencies with reality, and begin to devise alternative explanations.  For a while we may be uncertain as to which explanation is the best.  Eventually one of the alternative explanations might be seen as better. 

This is a dialectical process, a process that originated in ancient India and Greece in which two opposing sides discuss their views.  The dialectic is more recently associated with German philosophers George Hegel and Karl Marx, but it has general applicability.  We begin with a thesis, discover inadequacies in it, develop an alternative, the antithesis, and eventually resolve it with a synthesis.  We don't have to imbue this process with any scientific or historical inevitability, but it is a useful way of looking at how our understanding evolves.