# Problems Create a Logic of Reasoning David Deutsch has remarked that the concept of a [Problem](Problem.md) may be the most important concept introduced by Popper. As discussed in [Problem Driven Epistemology](Problem%20Driven%20Epistemology.md), the [Problem](Problem.md) was able to help us get away from [Justified True Belief](Justified%20True%20Belief.md). We now see that [Explanations Are Justified By Their Superior Ability to Solve Problems They Address](Explanations%20Are%20Justified%20By%20Their%20Superior%20Ability%20to%20Solve%20Problems%20They%20Address.md). But there is another deep aspect to problems that isn't spoken about as often. Problems are a *conflict* between ideas. Consider [Logic](Logic.md) for a moment. It is said that the rules of logic were first formulated in the hope that they would provide an impartial and infallible method of resolving all disputes. The original hope of logic can never be fulfilled. The study of logic itself revealed that the scope of logical deduction as a means of discovering the truth is severely limited. Given substantive assumptions about the world, one can deduce conclusions; but the conclusions are no more secure than the assumptions. The only propositions that logic can prove without recourse to assumptions are tautologies — statements such as ‘all planets are planets’, which assert nothing[^1]. However, let us pause and reflect on the the true goal of logic. At it's core it was to provide a [Structure](Structure.md) to [Reason](Reason.md). If we could [Constrain](Constraints.md) our arguments to follow self evident [Rules](Rules.md), this would (so the idea goes) increase the quality of arguments, ensuring that they are correct. The power of [Logic](Logic.md) is that it *forces* you to abide by certain rules - [Logical Consistency Forces Taking a Position](Logical%20Consistency%20Forces%20Taking%20a%20Position.md). Those rules have the effect that, if followed, will yield an argument that is [Consistent](Consistent.md). Could we come up with something like a [Structure](Structure.md) of [Reason](Reason.md) that could be applied to [Explanations](Explanations.md)? How might that look? For starters, we can quickly see that not only do [Logic](Logic.md) and [Deduction](Deduction.md) have a gap in that they can only prove what is present in their premises, but they are also too narrow. We can certainly have an explanation that is logically acceptable, and yet still a terrible explanation. So we can see that [Logic](Logic.md) provides a set of [Necessary but not Sufficient](Necessary%20but%20not%20Sufficient.md) criterion for arguments. But what was so appealing about the logical ideals of the ancients? It was that logic provided a *structure*, a *framework*, that we could use to reason. The most powerful aspect of logic was that it *forced* your arguments to follow certain constraints. What concepts could we incorporate into reasoning that provide that same benefit? Enter Poppers concept of a [Problem](Problem.md). A problem is a conflict between ideas. This concept of a "conflict" *captures* the key attributes of logic that we were so concerned about. A conflict could be that an idea is [Incoherent](Incoherent.md), [Inconsistent](Inconsistent.md), or [Incompatible](Incompatible.md). It ensures that By focusing on problems it is an organic way to ensure that you are always creating not only logically sound arguments, by in general reasoning in a way that yields the best possible explanations. Problems [Constrain](Constraints.md) our reasoning by [Forcing us To Take a Position](Forced%20To%20Take%20a%20Position.md). It is in this way that [Problems](Problem.md) create a [Logic](Logic.md) of [Reason](Reason.md). We can state this another way: there is an inherent *logic of explanation*. When we seek an explanation, we are searching for a coherent and consistent account of the world. This means our explanations are governed by logical principles that enforce consistency, which can force us to take a position. --- Date: 20241230 Links to: Tags: References: * []() [^1]: [Fabric of Reality](Fabric%20of%20Reality.md) pg 225