• You are currently viewing our forum as a guest, which gives you limited access to view most discussions and access our other features. By joining our free community, you will have access to additional post topics, communicate privately with other members (PM), view blogs, respond to polls, upload content, and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free, so please join our community today! Just click here to register. You should turn your Ad Blocker off for this site or certain features may not work properly. If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us by clicking here.

How Do You "Prove" an Abstract Concept?

G

Ginkgo

Guest
I recently had a discussion with my father about how things such as apologies, forgiveness, love, and other abstract concepts are "proven". For instance, one couple might have a verbal exchange of "I love you", and "I love you", and find essential meaning within this exchange. There is an interpersonal transaction that is found therein. However, for others, the proof is in the pudding. To them you are not "sorry" unless you have proven your regret by their means. It should be noted that a concrete proof never actually satiates an abstract notion in my opinion, it only satiates a personal desire. Of course, there's another route: finding consistency within the abstract concept.

How do you, as an individual, reconcile things of this nature?
 

Words of Ivory

facettes de la petite mor
Joined
Jun 19, 2010
Messages
492
MBTI Type
INFJ
How do you, as an individual, reconcile things of this nature?
I don't. I just spend forever mulling over them.

It is impossible to prove such thing. They require a leap of faith to believe is - that is why they are called abstract concepts, and not concrete ones.
 

Colors

The Destroyer
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,276
MBTI Type
ISTP
Enneagram
5w4
Instinctual Variant
so/sx
Yeah, it sounds unnecessary. If abstract things need proof, it's obviously abstract (intangible) proof. You can set A = 1, but you can also set A = 6. It doesn't really follow to compare apples and oranges.

And of course that's a silly argument, because there is nothing that is totally abstract. And for some people, the sufficient level of concrete proof of "sorry" is simply the tone of the word. For others, the accompanying gestures and facial expressions. Gifts. Length of sentiment. Restitution, etc.
 

InsatiableCuriosity

New member
Joined
May 20, 2010
Messages
698
MBTI Type
INTP
Enneagram
5
I recently had a discussion with my father about how things such as apologies, forgiveness, love, and other abstract concepts are "proven". For instance, one couple might have a verbal exchange of "I love you", and "I love you", and find essential meaning within this exchange. There is an interpersonal transaction that is found therein. However, for others, the proof is in the pudding. To them you are not "sorry" unless you have proven your regret by their means. It should be noted that a concrete proof never actually satiates an abstract notion in my opinion, it only satiates a personal desire. Of course, there's another route: finding consistency within the abstract concept.

How do you, as an individual, reconcile things of this nature?

This is a really difficult concept to assess - saying that you are sorry or that you love someone can be just trite statements that have no depth. They are often merely expected politenesses, or may be used as leverage/collateral to achieve a given end even if there is no true intent. The abstraction lay in how the recipient of such a statement KNOWS whether the statement is true. Indeed is the verbal statement even necessary if the recipient KNOWS that the abstract exists - although it is nice to be told that someone loves you?
 

Unkindloving

Lungs & Lips Locked
Joined
Dec 10, 2009
Messages
2,963
MBTI Type
ENFJ
Enneagram
4w5
Fe, probably. I assess what others need in order to believe in a concept and how far i am willing to go to meet that need. This isn't feigned either. If i can't meet their need genuinely, then there is no point in making the attempt.
I also assess their believability. Commonly, i'm tuned into another person's sincerity and the only time i find fault in the assessment is if i'm compromised by my own thoughts and feelings. (This could actually become an elsewhere topic)

Everyone's proof and proof requirements do tend to vary. The things that should be kept in mind are how genuine the proof is and how reasonable the requirements are. Given this also varies due to the individual, but starting with that awareness will leave even less room for gaps in understanding.
 

Zangetshumody

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
458
MBTI Type
INTJ
It seems to me the conversation with your father was a kind of specialized case of the 'problem of other minds'... There is nothing here that calls into question the cogency of anything abstract, just whether or not a person can truly ever be satisfied that some expected sentiment is being authentically experienced in another person's psyche.

Well, we do know for certain that at least some people are sociopaths (supposedly they learn to act normal), and worst case scenario, this is all the matrix. Otherwise if your totally clueless in the commonsense department you could read a law textbook on evidence to learn how to infer 'proof' from sets of facts, or in this case, how to read behaviour, but obviously, its not a perfect science...

"Doubt is not a pleasant condition, but certainty is absurd." Voltaire


By the way, what do you mean by "finding consistency in the abstract concept"?
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
In relation to God I've begun to dread anyone finding proof, it could just mean that the whole of existence blinks out.
 

KDude

New member
Joined
Jan 26, 2010
Messages
8,243
In most cases, it's probably best to not worry about trying to prove anything. It all depends on what your profession may be too, or if something really important is counting on it (and if that's the case, just speak with passion..that's all you have when it comes down to it), but in daily life, you're better off embodying the ideas and concepts important to you first.. you might help others see their worth that way.
 

Lark

Active member
Joined
Jun 21, 2009
Messages
29,569
I just got this vision of a scientist in a lab some place some how comprehending God perfectly and then spontaneously combusting or something like that or worse, evidencing it to their peers with a big equation and being like "Hence, it is clear... PFFT!!! Not even time for an "Oh Shit!"
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
An emotionally abstract concept is proven when both parties agree it's been proven.

Really, the approval of the other party is the only thing that matters. You're not trying to prove something definative with a single answer, like the water is a certain temprature or the sky is blue, you're trying to meet some qualification set by the other.
 

Zangetshumody

Member
Joined
Nov 19, 2009
Messages
458
MBTI Type
INTJ
An emotionally abstract concept is proven when both parties agree it's been proven.

Really, the approval of the other party is the only thing that matters. You're not trying to prove something definative with a single answer, like the water is a certain temprature or the sky is blue, you're trying to meet some qualification set by the other.

So the sociopath that appears to exhibit love and the people who buy the act are in the same boat as the genuine feelers and perceivers? I guess you could choose to be indifferent to such a distinction, but it just seems that any sort of philosophical thought that would fail to render that difference loses all notion of 'truth', replaced by a relativism that can't imagine anything more than mere perception.

The "qualification set by the other" as you put it, in this context, would refer to the quality of authenticity;- is the person appearing to undergo a psychological state or exhibiting genuine sentiment. The truth is, this qualification cannot be satisfied by inductive reasoning, which is the kind experiential concerns are prone... so it is a question that has no conclusive answer.
 

Feops

New member
Joined
Feb 15, 2009
Messages
829
MBTI Type
INTx
So the sociopath that appears to exhibit love and the people who buy the act are in the same boat as the genuine feelers and perceivers? I guess you could choose to be indifferent to such a distinction, but it just seems that any sort of philosophical thought that would fail to render that difference loses all notion of 'truth', replaced by a relativism that can't imagine anything more than mere perception.

The "qualification set by the other" as you put it, in this context, would refer to the quality of authenticity;- is the person appearing to undergo a psychological state or exhibiting genuine sentiment. The truth is, this qualification cannot be satisfied by inductive reasoning, which is the kind experiential concerns are prone... so it is a question that has no conclusive answer.

The sociopath who is pretending to agree isn't actually agreeing.
 

Mole

Permabanned
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
20,284
The abstract is proved by the truth of the particular.

The abstract concept of Relativity is proved by the truth of the particular that the sun bends light.
 

Manis

New member
Joined
Jun 24, 2010
Messages
47
MBTI Type
INFP
It can't just be a matter of consensus. Two people could be in love with entirely different subjective ideas of what love is. Think about justice also: a criminal and his family are unlikely to agree that his sentence is just. I don't think the mutuality of something really makes it more valid or true, it is entirely down to the individual's subjective expectations.

And Lark, to quote Douglas Adams:

"There is a theory which states that if ever anyone discovers exactly what the Universe is for and why it is here, it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.

There is another theory which states that this has already happened."
 
Top