Aspects to Commonsense Reasoning

Are there fundamentally any more? Please add to the list. 

(Some of these relate to each other).

1. a) By definition - medicine is "good" (by definition medicine heals/cures).

          b) Relates to basic or definitive property - car will take you faster than walking,

if it's at the bottom of the sea, its not visible from outside,

waiter telling a customer to bring a dish to eat,

not recognizing your brother.

2. Something less important as against more important - 

Saw some statues, but not the Eiffel tower on visit to Paris. 

Fighting with the car-owner who dashed your car as against taking your injured friend to the hospital

3. Alternative - if not this, something else.   

           If this pen doesnt work, take some other one.

4. Relates to (reinforces or defeats) the very reason or purpose of saying or doing or of existence, of something - 

“killed with a gun” implies shot with a gun and not say banged the gun on the head 10 times. 

I called out to him, implies I can speak.

5. ‘Disproportionate’ness/proportion - 

Every American has a President (same for all; not one for each), every American has a mother (different for each, not the same one for all)

More the price lesser the demand

Early bird catches worm

6. Pivotal dependence -   

If the phone is not charged in the first place, then no use of the numerous functionalities and features

OR

“Gateway to a lot” : (multiple/most number of/monumental things depending upon a single one/very few) -

wedding without the bride or the groom

7. a) Unnecessary - a note-book for writing a letter, need to steal something you own, something happens on its own - no need to do anything for it

b) Misdirected efforts - push an object with a string, cutting a tree with a razor, cutting hair with an axe.

8. Completeness - One thing useless without the other (left shoe without the right shoe). 

9. Inclusive implication - 

If you own a Mercedes, then you own a cell phone.

            If a building has a “5th floor” it has a 2nd floor (but not necessarily a 7th floor).

10. Relating to Cases of maxima / minima /abundance / rarity - 

            Hit where it hurts the most, score 100/100 - you will stand first whatever be the competition.

            If it’s once in a decade, preserve it

11. What else/more (could be)? - Set of conceivable possibilities. 

All of a total of known-to-be hundred items, numbered 1 to 100, have been checked while packing. What else could remain? (5 out of 5 means everything is present, nothing can be left out).

The human thief could be a male or a female. What else?

Definition of a link/connection

Let’s begin with something else. When we talk of ‘change’, it is by definition, change in the same thing - the same specific property of something.

When we compare 2 things, we can only compare their same corresponding properties. You cannot compare the weight of a book with the colour of a chair. So, when we say there is a similarity or a difference between 2 things, it is so between the same properties of the 2 things. 

The above leads us to the definition of a link - a typical connection between 2 entities : 

When 2 DIFFERENT properties of 2 entities are same/common, there is a link between the 2 entities. 

In fact, if there is a sameness between any 2 properties (one of each) of 2 entities, there is a link between the 2. In the second sentence, the definition is broadened to ANY 2 properties; that includes similarities as described in the first paragraph, as subsets of connections/links. 

If a chair is made of silver and a book has its name written on it in silver colour, there isn't any similarity between the 2 entities since different properties of the 2 entities bear sameness (material making up one and colour of ink of text written on the other) with each other, but a link.

The spotting of links between 2  entities is generally of value while thinking, in general.

An example of the above definition - Car and Petrol are connected - bear a link.

Firstly, what is the link? 

1. Car runs on petrol (car connecting to petrol)
2. Petrol resides in the tank of a car (Petrol connecting to car)

In the first case, the 2 properties (one of a car and one of petrol) - what car runs on, of a car - and what petrol is i.e. petrol itself, of petrol - bear sameness.

In the second case, the 2 properties (one of petrol and one of a car) - where petrol resides, of petrol - and what a car is i.e.car itself, of car - bear sameness. 

Relevance

Ask a kid - What is a chocolate box? Immediately pops the answer - A box containing chocolates.

Now, logically (as well as analogically), one might say  

Box made up of chocolates?  - just as a wooden box is made of wood.

Box inside chocolates? - just as a house-chair is inside a house and an office-chair is inside an office.

Box with ‘chocolate’ written on it? - just as a bournvita can is a can with ‘Bournvita’ written on it?

The above 3 alternatives are “wrong” not because they violate any logic, but because they violate commonsense. Hence they are odd, weird and just don't quite “make sense”.

OR

Consider these statements Jack told John -

1. A gave a pen to B.

2. C gave a pen to B.

One of the first things John would say (react with) is - 

Oh, so it seems to be a pen-day for B! or say Oh, it's all gifts pouring in today for B!’. 

It is very unlikely that John would say something like - ‘The flow while writing with a pen is so smooth!’ (This seems “odd”.) But note that logically speaking, the remark is connected to the 2 statements i.e. the statements and the (odd) remark both ARE ABOUT a pen.

So my question is - WHAT IS RELEVANT?

5 aspects to it - 

1. Logic v/s commonsense : 

1. 'I said it and he came'. (Why is this special? Logically there is nothing special about it.)

2. 'Nobody must have done this'. (One might say - So what? But it is a rationale we use to de-justify someone's action. Logically, it is not a reason to justify or dejustify).

2. What we react to in our every-day data-consumption : 

1. Spotting contradictions. e.g. first you said this, and now you are saying that.  E.g. - Such less furniture, for such a large house?

2. Spotting opposites/contrasts. E.g. Father's nature is completely the opposite of mother’s nature. 

3. Special arrangements of data : 

1.. 'all'/ 'full'/'everything' are special constructs. (They leave nothing behind...they create blankness).

Phrases like "all of it was used", "everything was taken" etc. are made with an emphasis. The cyclone washed away everything - not a nail of the house was left. 

2. We question 'too much change' in anything in a short time.

4. Interesting :

Some things are interesting by default.

E.g. - 1. First and last times are interesting by default. 2. Extremes (min and max) are interesting by default.

5. Precursors to thinking :

This is what can be called as the prelude to thinking. 

Examples - 

1. Repetition is of value by default! (In the pen example, the spotting of the repetition of the word ‘pen’ was the precursor to the remarks - Oh it seems to be a pen day for John

2. Too much of same together is interesting.

If you enter a room and see everyone is wearing a yellow shirt, it would trigger a thinking process (to find what it is about that).

Note - They happen even before thinking begins. In isolation, just by themselves, they are mindless, but are the initial processes before thinking. 

Context - provided by the ‘Human-centeredness' of the Meaning

We all know that meaning rests upon context.

Claim : It is provision of human-centered meaning / personification, that provides context.

Suppose you are holding a cell-phone for the first time. You see the screen. On the top right corner, you see ‘5:43 pm’. (Exclude factors like maybe the clock is not adjusted to the current local time). You intuitively and immediately conclude that it is the current time. Now, logically speaking, there is a cell-phone with a display, containing a data-element which reads as ‘5:43 pm’. That, in no way, necessarily implies that the current time is 5:43 pm!

What then makes you immediately feel that the current time is 5:43 pm? It is awareness of the context you are in - you are holding a phone - an electronic gadget; it is supposed to DISPLAY things to you (you are holding it FACING YOU) i.e. information, etc. So a time-mention should convey the current time since conveying time to anyone by anyone, in general too, is mostly, the current time. The ‘5:43 pm’ MEANS the current time to you, because of the CONTEXT you are in. 

Now look at this from the human-centered meaning or personification angle - you have sort of given a human identity to the phone by seeing it as an entity telling you things, talking to you, showing things to you etc. So, one can say that Psychologically speaking, it is the human-centered meaning provision or the personification angle given to entities one is interacting with (even seeing things - without holding them, as in this case) which runs the context-program (associated with the meaning of the entity), in the brain.

Diversity in nature

Why are things in nature more ‘different’ than ‘same’? Why is ‘difference’ the norm and similarity the exception, as against otherwise?

An intuitive Mathematical explanation - Arithmetic and Geometry.

Arithmetic - Consider 2 bags, each full of numbers - the same numbers (say, 1 to 1000). Pick up a number from the first and one from the second bag. There is more probability of they being UNEQUAL, than they being THE SAME. The chance of picking up a ‘47’ from the second bag too, after picking up a ‘47’ from the first bag is very very less. Inequality can happen in many ways; equality in only one special case. Thus there is more chance for inequality to happen.

OR

Geometry - 

Consider a vertical line as shown above. Draw curves on both the sides such that the line is a tangent to the curves. Keep drawing one curve on the left and one on the right, as shown. The chance of them coinciding / being the same is very less. They will be distinct like as seen in the above figure. Only when the radius of curvature of both the curves is infinite (when the curve coincides with the vertical lines) will the curves coincide and be the same. That's the special case. Difference is the norm, sameness the exception. 

Commonsense - only Logic and Precedence?

Question : Is there any commonsensical inference which is not on the basis of LOGIC or PRECEDENCE bases?

By PRECEDENCE, it is meant, things like - “Has this been seen or experienced before anywhere in the world? How many such cases would be there? …..etc.

And LOGIC includes Scientific logic like say gravity, electrostatic attraction/repulsion etc. 

Consider this data - John is in the living room.

COMMONSENSE INFERENCES - 

1. There is a living room somewhere - with its components - a floor (this is implied by LOGIC - gravity), furniture (PRECEDENCE - how many living rooms have you seen without furniture?), ceiling (PRECEDENCE - how many rooms have you seen without a ceiling?), walls (LOGIC - by definition of a room).
2. There exists a person called John. LOGIC. 
3. There is a house somewhere with the living room, with other room(s). PRECEDENCE; depends upon what you can call a living room.
4. Planet earth exists - LOGIC - "planet earth existing" is a symbolic statement for there not being nothing i.e. everything (the planet) collapsed/in disorder.
5. There is a certain date and time at that instance -  LOGIC.
6. John is  smaller than the living room / there is space in the living room for John. Both  LOGIC + CONCEIVABILITY PRECEDENCE. No one has been able to conceive “A inside B and yet A bigger than B”. 
7. Most of John's body parts are in the living room. STATISTICAL PRECEDENCE. How many such people exist? (that too in houses).
8. Someone built the house (living room). LOGIC SAYS NOT NECESSARY - it could be one of the solutions of the random natural processes. BUT NO PRECEDENCE of auto-building through natural process.
9. John existed all the while from his birth till that point in time. SCIENTIFIC LOGIC / PRECEDENCE - Once a person dies, he cannot become alive again. 
10. John has a father and a mother. SCIENTIFIC LOGIC / PRECEDENCE.
11. Someone owns the house LOGIC SAYS NOT NECESSARY (might be a haunted structure somewhere, no one went near to). BUT AGAIN HAS PRECEDENCE ARGUMENT - how many houses (or material things) exist which are not owned by anyone? (This point I am not sure of, in the sense - perhaps, even logically necessary).
12. John is below the clouds. PRECEDENCE - No structure has been built which reaches upto the clouds. . 

There are also some things which are NOT TRUE - 

1. John is not in the kitchen. PRECEDENCE. Both - the living room and kitchen can be the same, logically speaking.

2. John is not outside the house.  PRECEDENCE (living room outside the house). Or LOGIC if a living room, by definition has to be inside the house.

3. John is not having a bath. PRECEDENCE.

4. John isn't cooking food. PRECEDENCE.

5. John is not in a vehicle. LOGICALLY NOT NECESSARY. BUT AGAIN PRECEDENCE - Vehicle inside a living room. How many cases have you seen of a vehicle being inside a living room?