PODCAST: What is Epistemic Ambivalence?

Posted on June 2, 2024 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™

Epistemic Ambivalence!

CITE: https://www.r2library.com/Resource/Title/0826102549

[By staff reporters]

Epistemic Ambivalence is almost the opposite idea of what ambivalence means because to be epistemic means you know, you are sure.

Epistemic ambivalence is when you may know the truth of a situation but cannot say which truth it is, because there is more than one option.

***
***
***
MORE: Schrödinger’s cat is a thought experiment, sometimes described as a paradox, devised by Austrian physicist Erwin Schrödinger in 1935. It illustrates what he saw as the problem of the Copenhagen interpretation of quantum mechanics applied to everyday objects. The scenario presents a hypothetical cat that may be simultaneously both alive and dead, a state known as a quantum superposition, as a result of being linked to a random subatomic event that may or may not occur. The thought experiment is also often featured in theoretical discussions of the interpretations of quantum mechanics. Schrödinger coined the term Verschränkung (entanglement) in the course of developing the thought experiment.
***
Assessment: Your thoughts are appreciated.
***
Comprehensive Financial Planning Strategies for Doctors and Advisors: Best Practices from Leading Consultants and Certified Medical Planners(TM)
***

Invite Dr. Marcinko

***

Filed under: Ethics, Marcinko Associates, Touring with Marcinko, Videos | Tagged: , , , | 2 Comments »

On Deductive & Inductive Reasoning; Null Semantics, Syllogisms and Expletive Logic

Posted on February 8, 2020 by Dr. David Edward Marcinko MBA MEd CMP™

On “WHAT’S-WHAT” and more!

By Dr. David E. Marcinko MBA

Is there a Difference? – Know the Difference!

DEDUCTIVE reasoning and logic is the process of reasoning from one or more statements (premises) to reach a logically certain conclusion. Deductive reasoning goes in the same direction as the conditionals, and links premises with conclusions. If all premises are true, the terms are clear, and the rules of deductive logic are followed, then the conclusion reached is necessarily true.

INDUCTIVE reasoning is a method in which the premises are viewed as supplying some evidence for the truth of the conclusion. While the conclusion of a deductive argument is certain, the truth of the conclusion of an inductive argument may be probable, based upon the evidence given. Many dictionaries define inductive reasoning as the derivation of general principles from specific observations, though there are many inductive arguments that do not have that form.

***

***

SEMANTICALLY NULL doesn’t mean anything but is grammatically sound. A sentence as a whole can be semantically null because its internal inconsistencies prevent it from developing a meaning; ie., “I know what’s what?

An EXPLETIVE is a word or phrase inserted into a sentence that is not needed to express the basic meaning of the sentence. It is regarded as semantically null or a place holder.

A SYLLOGISM is a form of reasoning in which a conclusion is drawn (whether validly or not) from two given or assumed propositions (premises), each of which shares a term with the conclusion, and shares a common or middle term not present in the conclusion (e.g., all dogs are animals; all animals have four legs; therefore all dogs have four legs). This school of epistemology is highly advanced in syllogism and logical reasoning.

MORE: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2019/05/14/what-is-epistemic-ambivalence/

MORE: https://medicalexecutivepost.com/2019/12/23/rationalism-versus-empiricism/

Conclusion: Your thoughts are appreciated.

***

Product DetailsProduct DetailsProduct Details

***

Filed under: Glossary Terms, iMBA, Inc. | Tagged: , , , , | Leave a comment »