3,078
edits
Changes
no edit summary
If think our observation is reliable, we will follow and conjecture a new structure for our mental object. In the "red apple" we may say that apples can be both green and red. We may say that there are apple which are green and some new object that is red, and has all the other properties of apples. We may add some imaginary objects, which we have not observed by our senses, which can explain this divergent from prediction. For instance we may conjecture that someone has painted the green apple in red color. These unobserved objects that can "save" our misprediction are called imaginary mental objects ([[MOi]]).
We may use imaginary mental objects whenever our predictions fail, and this tendency was called by Popper auxiliary theories <ref> Popper, Karl. The logic of scientific discovery. Routledge, 2002.</ref>.Yet when we check the corroboration of these imaginary mental objects, if their proprtie can be checked directly by the senses, or they can influence sensory mental objects that we can check. For example, if we noticed that there is a hole in our apple we can conjecture that something ate it during the night, when we didn't observe the apple pile. By the size of the hole in my apple, I may conjecture that it was a small creature. I know that mice tend to go around in people houses, and thus I can estimate that the creature that made the hole was a mouse. So now I have explanation to the hole in the apple. I may leave it alone and have only ad-hoc imaginary mental objects that explain the hole, but if I want to consolidate my theory (or string of imaginary mental objects), I can further search for evidences. I may look for mouse droppings, which are indirect evidence (or sensory mental objects) that relate to mice, and are part of the properties of mice. I can also look for more direct evidences by setting mice traps, which will help find my alleged mouse. But not all imaginary mental objects are observable, for instance God is an imaginary mental object that can explain many unexplained phenomena, and can let us avoid the need for critical thinking when our predictions fail. It can explain how life evolved, or why some people suffer and other thrive. Yet no one has ever been able to show it directly to other people. The same is true to the force of gravity. We have never seen the force of gravity. The difference between the imaginary mental object of God and that of force of gravity, is that the first is most unpredictable and therefore cannot be checked by other people or by ourselves (we can only believe God exists, but we cannot verify its existence), and the later can be checked by everyone, by checking its affect on sensory mental objects. We can all see if the stone which I'll drop in a minute will fall to the ground, according to the properties of the law of gravitation.
==References==
<references/>