Inference to the best explanation is a wise approach

In the course of reading books about modern science, I frequently come across an appealing phrase: inference to the best explanation.

I like the sound of it. It makes sense to me. It's a foundation of both the scientific method and how we deal with issues in everyday life.

Defining this approach in any detail can lead into some tricky philosophical territory that I'm not much interested in. This article summary from the Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy is good enough for blog post purposes.

Inference to the best explanation is the procedure of choosing the hypothesis or theory that best explains the available data. The factors that make one explanation better than another may include depth, comprehensiveness, simplicity and unifying power. According to Harman (1965), explanatory inference plays a central role in both everyday and scientific thinking.

In ordinary life, a person might make the inference that a fuse has blown to explain why several kitchen appliances stopped working all at once. Scientists also seem to engage in inference to the best explanation; for example, astronomers concluded that another planet must exist in order to account for aberrations in the orbit of Uranus. However, despite the suggestiveness of cases like these, the extent to which we do and should rely on inference to the best explanation is highly controversial.

Highly controversial? Well, maybe to professional philosophers. Choosing a hypothesis that best fits the available data seems not very controversial to me.

Here's two slides from an academic presentation on this subject that I came across via some Googling.

"Comic relief" is a good way of describing how I've come to look upon supernatural religious claims. They're akin to the notion of tracks in the snow being made by a trained monkey wearing snowshoes. Possible, but highly improbable. 

Likewise, it's possible that God exists. It's possible that life after death is a reality. It's possible that consciousness is immaterial rather than being produced by goings-on in the brain. But each of these possibilities is highly improbable, given the evidence.

Thus they don't pass the Inference to the Best Explanation test. Other hypotheses do: God is a fantasy. When we die we're dead and gone forever. Consciousness is produced by the brain.

But here's the beautiful thing about taking a scientific approach to reality.

An open mind is able to adjust to fresh facts with ease. If somehow solid evidence appeared for the existence of God, life after death, or the immaterial nature of consciousness, I'd have no problem changing my mind on these subjects. 

Even more, I'd joyfully change my mind, since I think it'd be great if any or all of those things were true.

How many religious believers, though, can honestly say the same thing? I suspect, not many. Meaning, what if undeniable evidence surfaced that the foundation of their religious faith was false? Could they give up their religious belief as easily as I could surrender my atheism?

I doubt it.

This is the difference between open-minded atheism and closed-minded religiosity. Every atheist I know -- and I know a lot of them -- is open to the possibility of a supernatural side to reality. However, my experience is that most religious people are so attached to their chosen faith, they have great difficulty imagining giving it up.

I'll end by saying that engaging in inference to the best explanation isn't necessary, or desirable, in many areas of life. For example, our personal likes and dislikes. We don't need reasons for liking or disliking broccoli; or rap music; or New York City; or watching baseball; or countless other things.

That said, I feel that we still need to keep an open mind to our own predilections, what appeals to us, because we can surprise ourselves.

For example, I've been pondering a replacement for my much-beloved 2017 VW GTI for quite a few months. I enjoy automobile "window shopping." Reading car reviews and watching You Tube reviews is a pleasure for me. Because I'd driven a Mini Cooper S for five years prior to the three years I've driven the GTI, I'd been focused on other small, fast, fun cars.

Yet I'd paid attention to other subcompact cars such as the Subaru Crosstrek. My "inference," so to speak, was that even though I'd never driven a Crosstrek, I wouldn't like it, given its underwhelming engine. 

However, the more I pondered my driving wants and needs, the more I realized that a Crosstrek could make sense as a GTI replacement. After a test drive, I wrote a post on one of my other blogs, "Here's my pitch to be in a Subaru commercial." Excerpt:

Today, though, I drove the GTI to Capitol Subaru to test drive a 2019 Crosstrek Limited. I adore small cars. I'd studied the Crosstrek because I liked its subcompact size and all-wheel-drive (it's just eight inches longer than the decidedly small GTI). 

However, I couldn't get past the reviews that talked about the underpowered Crosstrek engine and lack of driving excitement. A few days ago something changed in my psyche, though.

I began thinking to myself, Maybe at the age of 71 I've had enough of fast cars that handle great. Perhaps it's time for a new phase in my car life. 

A few days ago I put in an order for a 2020 Crosstrek. I waited a while after the test drive to make sure that my change of automotive heart wasn't an impulsive fling. It wasn't. I'd changed. I'd altered my personal inference to the best explanation of what car I wanted.

Such is life. When we're open to change, to fresh facts, to surprising ourselves about what we value and believe.

Comments

[Jesse]

While I agree that any particular dogma, be it "the mystics" or a traditional religion generally fail to provide any serious answers about anything at all, I have never thought atheism made any sense either. To me, the so-called supernatural seems most rationally explanation by the existence of the natural world.

Existence itself is so seemingly random and bizarre and such a mind fuck that I can't infer that it's self-made and without origin. Or I have no reason to accept that premise at least. There's no reason to accept anything that anyone says on the subject whatsoever. Believers, scientists, dimwits, geniuses. Nobody knows anything.

Sure, if we're just looking at physical evidence for the origins of physicality itself, or even the concept of physicality, or the concept of a concept or anything at all, we won't find it. That's why these things must be relegated to the domain of philosophy and religion.

It's sort of sad I guess, but there's no other way than to speculate, ponder and wonder. Or in the case of many readers of this blog, lose sleep and half your life believing a dude from Punjab will carry your fat ass to heaven.

[Dungeness]

It's sort of sad I guess, but there's no other way than to speculate, ponder and wonder. Or in the case of many readers of this blog, lose sleep and half your life believing a dude from Punjab will carry your fat ass to heaven.

The mystic says speculating, pondering, wondering is what gets you
in trouble. Forget that! Far better to forget heaven too and that
Punjabi "dude" outside. Be mindful and experience truth inside.
It's the fastest way to get your fat ass the hell outta Dodge.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Dungeness
You wrote
"The mystic says speculating, pondering, wondering is what gets you in trouble. Forget that! Far better to forget heaven too and that
Punjabi "dude" outside. Be mindful and experience truth inside.
It's the fastest way to get your fat ass the hell outta Dodge."

Amen.
Is there an Atheist / pc word for that?

[Whodunit]

You know I still can't quite get my head around the atheist position?

How do they make this circular type reasoning from a chicken and egg type concept of irrational mental construction?

Firstly who or what created material matter? Which is the stuff that humans brain is made of? The energy or electric charge that ignite between nodes and neurons to spark thought or consciousness is derived from where or what? To stimulate thinking about it's own experience and existing and ideas about its origin?

Where does the natural essence of life creation out of male sperm seed cells by impregnation of female egg cells to form material body and brain out of what?

To develop conscious thinking feeling emotionally charged empathetic and reciprocal attention and attaching or repellent thoughts and feelings of desire and effects and conditions all from sinews and tissues coordinate together into cortexes of highly developed intelligence?

Mirror images of higher intelligence in universal formation and creative design from source of absolute nothingness?

All this being done by a haphazard randomly unintelligent field of action and reaction called nature?

Come on, it's like a disingenuous attempt at ludicrous audacity to suggest that your own brain (and body, mind, subtle energy meridians, thoughts, feelings, emotions) is the architect of its own making.

And that your evolution is a direct result of some haphazard unintelligent random dead end force of nature. That when your body dies its the end, kaput, no life beyond your physical construction of particular held together materials made from genetic unintelligent cells by a force of nature and energy called 'life'.

And before this 'life' existed, before any spark of energy explosion into a massive scale of creativity called 'big bang' wtf, or more pertently, who tf, existed then?

[Dungeness]

Amen.
Is there an Atheist / pc word for that

Maybe "Amenfree" ( to the tune of allie, allie, in free!)

[Jesse]

"speculating, pondering, wondering is what gets you in trouble"

"Be mindful and experience truth inside."

What is speculating and pondering if not going "inside?" And what use is this other more magical "inside" that you imagine and lie about if "masters" such as Faqir Chand are told "inside" to literally eat shit by the same godmen you worship, and people from this blog are told what dosage of tylenol or whatever to eat?

Has anyone gone "inside" and learned from their chosen baba whether they should eat shit or aspirin? Seems the only two options on the radha soami path are instructions on eating one of those things.

[Spence Tepper]

Hi Whodunit
You ask
"Firstly who or what created material matter? Which is the stuff that humans brain is made of? The energy or electric charge that ignite between nodes and neurons to spark thought or consciousness is derived from where or what? To stimulate thinking about it's own experience and existing and ideas about its origin?"

The Atheist (as opposed to the Anti-theist) doesn't claim to know. They love this miracle we live in so much they don't want to wrap it up in artificial stories. Which distinguishes them from religion.

Once you settle for a story instead of the actual reality there truth is lost.

You ask good questions, but they lose their value when people answer them with superstition.

[Dungeness]

What is speculating and pondering if not going "inside?"

It is. Every great idea arose from inside but so is jumping on a soapbox,
and ranting that a vile conspiracy theory is true. Ultimately, though
you have to understand and overcome the the mind itself to avoid
the later. Mindfulness facilitates that.

And what use is this other more magical "inside" that you imagine and lie about if "masters" such as Faqir Chand are told "inside" to literally eat shit by the same godmen you worship, and people from this blog are told what dosage of tylenol or whatever to eat?

Whew, didn't you famously complain about "praying a horrible sentence
would end". If I got the gist though, I'd respond by repeating a story
Ishwar Puri told about a disciple bragging to a friend "My faith in the
master is so great I'd jump off a building if told to. What would you do?".
His friend replied I'd say "Master, you first".

[Jesse]

"vile conspiracy theory"

Burp. Fart. Lol.

"didn't you famously complain "

I'm glad you remember the things I say and consider them to be "famous", Dungeness, because I'm super important and what I say matters. My complaints are especially important and meaningful. Continue paying attention. Take notes.

I'm just thinking about inference you know, and wondering wtf you're supposed to infer from a mystic system that repeatedly tells people to eat shit and ibuprofin. How is this even supposed to be considered a part of any epistemology? Why is it mentioned, ever, for any reason? The I ching would be better to talk about than "going inside."

[Georgy Porgy]

Atheist means no belief in god, from the latin. This is not saying: I don’t know if there is a god, that is an Agnostic. These colonials know-it-alls know nothing.

An anti-theist seems some kinda made up pseudo English word. Presumably someone who is against any belief in god.

Only the agnostic has an undecided position. The atheist or antitheist has a pretty fixed outlook - there is no god.

So whodunnit raises a v good question. Even the most scientifically minded person has to wonder how is it possible, or even probable, that such depth of human emotions, like love and transendence, can be explained as the result of random bits of matter popping into and out of existence.

Nope there is more to it. Something science hasn’t even remotely cottoned onto and I suspect no amount of human intellect can or ever will be able to understand or grasp.

[Spence Tepper]

Actually Georgy, science proves nothing is random.

To pigeon hole science as random is inaccurate.

Atheist... Theist is believer.. Theism.. God.

A-theist from the Latin is without belief, not against it. A person who simply lives without a belief in God.

The prefix is without, not antagonistic to... Which would be the Latin prefix anti-

Agnostic is without actual knowledge... Gnosis.

They aren't anti - knowledge of God. Just without personal knowledge. They may have belief but it isn't specific.

Hence the Latin prefix a often means without, or outside of...

Amoral
Without morals, outside of morals.

Asymmetrical,
Without symmetry. Outside of symmetry.

A priori
Outside of, before

A posteriori
Outside of, after

[anami]

I had the same debate over the word 'atheism' months ago with Osho. There's no singular definition...
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism
"Atheism is, in the broadest sense, an absence of belief in the existence of deities. Less broadly, atheism is a rejection of the belief that any deities exist. In an even narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities."
There are qualifiers such as strong/weak and hard/soft, as Osho explained. Other categories include implicit/explicit and positive/negative.

[anami]

"Antitheism (sometimes anti-theism) is the opposition to theism.[1][2] The term has had a range of applications. In secular contexts, it typically refers to direct opposition to the belief in any deity."
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antitheism

[Georgy Porgy]

Much of science is based on randomness. DNA mutations or how da baba comes with a bang or any other big bangs or small ones, quantum theory, chaos theory, information theory to thermodynamic - you name it.

It was Einstein who refused to believe that god plays dice. Einstein was agnostic and didn’t like randomness. Yet modern science has said he is wrong and set out to prove it for the last 50 years since Bohr, which you should know something about if you got the foggiest about sparrow entanglement and not all complete bs.

But meaningless randomness is precisely the overarching picture that accepted science provides, including the mechanism of evolution by natural selection.

[Michael]

Spence
Good wordplay
Add this one to your list:
Antiatheism

[Jim Sutherland]

Jessie writes,.....” What is speculating and pondering if not going "inside?" And what use is this other more magical "inside" that you imagine and lie about if "masters" such as Faqir Chand are told "inside" to literally eat shit by the same godmen you worship, and people from this blog are told what dosage of tylenol or whatever to eat?

Has anyone gone "inside" and learned from their chosen baba whether they should eat shit or aspirin? Seems the only two options on the radha soami path are instructions on eating one of those things.”

Me: to clarify, it was NOT any Radhasoami Master that Fakir Chand met inside and told him to eat cow shit. It was a Hindu Deity he had been meditating on before he became familiar with Sat Mat. It was Ram , if I remember, with out accessing his books again. But it definitely was Not a Radhasoami Master. The Aspirin comment was aimed at me, so considering it was Charan Singh, a Radhasoami Master who appeared to me while I was in deep Meditation, in Samadhi, and appeared in full body view, as clear as day, one foot away from me, looked me in the eyes, spoke in his Indian English accent, gave me advice that was totally unknown to any one, touched me, listened to my comments, answered, then disappeared. There was a Huge difference, between Fakir walking along the road thinking about Ram, and seeing a Cow Patty and Ram telling him to eat it, and Charan appearing to me, one of his 1,250,000 Initiates, and taking a minute out of his Sach Khand scedule, to visit me , or find me, where ever I was, in the formless, soundless, Void.
You are a young Rebel Rouser, Son, by your condescending comments to just about every one you attempt to ridicule. You are young enough to be my Grand Son, so you should not venture in to spiritual Realms you don’t know any thing about, and think you will convince Mystics like me who access these Realms daily that they do not exist. If you have a Facebook Account, I invite you to an Ishwar Puri Facebook site hosted by Dr. Richard Ruquist, Ph.D. Who is a Physicist, a retired Military Star Wars Engineer, during the Reagon Administration. Dr. Ruquist was an Atheist, when I encountered him on an Atheist Forum, where I had been a little of my Sant Mat Wisdom on the forum. Google Richard Ruquist, Ph.D., and read some of his Papers on Physics he got published, if you think intelligent people with high I.Q.s are too smart to accept Sant Mat as a viable Spiritual Philosophy, in fact, the Highest of the Best! After I privately counseled Dr.Ruquist for a few months, and answered his thousands of skeptical questions, he was drawn to Sant Mat, at 78 years old, dick, depressed, but with a new Hope, and he had never heard of not only Sant Mat, or any of the Masters, but never had even heard of Eckankar. He wanted to be initiated, but did not think he was worthy enough, but I motivated him to apply for initiation leaving the choice of Masters to him. He chose to be initiated by Dr. Iswar Puri, and traveled across the country in the dead of Winter, sick, but with Hope, that he might be accepted. He WAS accepted, and was initiated by Dr. Puri Jan. 2015, and has become a changed man, now 82, and using his understanding of a Physics to verify Sant Mat as a valid Spiritual Philosophy. On his F.B. Site, many of the usual Exer Skeptics are Voyeurs, but no one seems to be qualified to challenge his Conjectures! Go see for you self, if you think you can share your condescending Wisdom with him, and his Group which now numbers around 500 Members, when I last looked. Many of my Posts are there also, where I offer a few Meditation Tips that have launched me in to the Realm where Master Charan found me.

[um]

@ Jim Sutherland,

Like you, the prophet had someone that appeared before him, ordering him to write the koran. There is no reason to question that, these things do happen and make an deep impression upon those who have it.

The problem is however that we only have the word of the prophet, the hear-say … and … the lord forgot to tell me and the rest of the world that he had spoken to the prophet by means of an angel and that we should heed the words of the prophet.

[Jim Sutherland]

A High I.Q. Group that Dr. Richard Ruquist is a member of, posted this in the Group a week ago, which sent me an invitation to join. I accepted.
This is what he wrote on the Group’s Site,.....” This reminds me that Jim Sutherland should be added to this group. He is a conservative who also is a mystic. He is/was my mentor who introduced me to Sant Mat and encouraged me to seek initiation from Dr. Ishwar Puri who resides outside of Chicago, which I did in 2015. Although he is a conservative and I am a socialist, we have the same religious beliefs which are basically Sikh or Hindu. He is a former christian Pastor whereas I am a former Anglican turned atheist turned Jew. He is a friend on FACEBOOK

Linda, what should I tell him to do to join?. ”

So, better for young Jessie to hear it from Dr. Ruquist, Ph.D., now a Sant Mat Initiate, Physicist , than me. There are some very high Ai.Q. Members there, that gave me a hearty Welcome. ( including Atheists!) So, as the Bible says, “ a man’s gifts will place him before great men”, Paraphrased, with out looking up the Verse. But the a Group Moderator is a real high I.Q. Female, and as Fate unfolds, she is a High Degree Initiate of the Rosicrucians, haven been initiated in to all of the same Degrees as I was, before I was initiated in to Sant Mat.

Jim Sutherland

[Jim Sutherland]

@um,......I never said Charan told me to make any recommendations to any one, other than me. If I suddenly start saying Charan gave me a message for you, or others, than if it is genuine, no doubt each person that is effected will also receive the same message from other sources to verify its authenticity.
Jim Sutherland

[Jesse]

"You are a young Rebel Rouser, Son, by your condescending comments to just about every one you attempt to ridicule."

I'm older than you think.

Don't mistake my immaturity for youth. Similarly don't confuse your brain telling you to eat acetaminophen for mysticism.

[seeker]

Jim

What's the name of thay group on Facebook? Can't locate it. Thanks.

[Jim Sutherland]

@Seeker,.....here is the Link you asked for to the Ishwar site Dr. Ruquist administers. Not many post there, as they Voyeurs only. Even a Dabid Lane is lurking there.

https://www.facebook.com/groups/261776920960977/?ref=share

@Jessie,.....you posted you were in your 30s,...36, if I remember a year or so ago, responding to Bad Assed , but polite ( unlike you) Soldier Arjuna. So, to me, you are young enough to be my Grand Son, considering I have a 56 year old Son and a 57 year old Daughter. If I ever read either of them addressing other people like you do, to ALL people you don’t even know, I would cut them out of my Will for being such unkind Potty mouths. Disagreeing with others, does not give us a License to verbally destroy them, especially, publicly. If you spoke like you do to any U.S. Marine, , active, or retired, you’d better be ready for Combat in the Octagon or Cage. Didn’t your Parents teach you any manners, on how to treat other Human Beings? You obviously must have never served in any Branches of the Military, or the D.I.s would have knocked that Chip off your shoulder in Boot Camp, which never grows back once knocked off. I was in Boot Camp a month after I turned 17, and was quickly taught how to respect my Elders and Superiors, as well as my Fellow Recruits, which has served me well through life. I may disagree with many, but never disrespect their being a Human, which you try to do with just about every one you encounter. You seem like a young Archie Bunker to me, i.e. no Social manners. Being a disgruntled RSSB Exer under Gurinder, II can understand, if he had initiated me, but hey Son, did he or any one else kidnap you, and forcefully make you go through all of the hoops required to be initiated! Take a little responsibility for you own actions, with out blaming others for your mistakes and failures for a change. Come on, young Man, it’s not too late for you to lighten up, and change your ways. Respect Humanity, by recognizing a Fellow Soul in every Living Creature that crosses your path, and speak to them like they are your Human Brothers & Sisters for a change. You will be rewarded.
Cheers,
Jim

[Um]

@ Jim Sutherland

>>,......I never said Charan told me to make any recommendations to any one, other than me<<

That is correct and I didn't write or suggested that you did.

The point I wanted to make was that these type of experiences however realistic they might appear to one might be interpretable in different ways.

Different disciples of MCS, based upon their conversations with what they experienced as the radiant form of the Master started to initiate. When they were advised to verify their experience with the master they would not do that as the outer Master, time and again had stated that he as not the master and the radiant form was the real master. If the verified the vision with simran and the form remained they could trust it.

This being the variation of hat I wrote about the prophet.

The fact that Thomas could lay his fingers in the wound of the radiant Christ doesn't mean their was an radiant christ …. that Thomas could not but believe it is understandable. If I was confronted with such an experience, I suppose I would react in the same ay and take it as real.

Ant way the Lord if there is one spoke to the prophet but he never told me or anybody else the same or to listen to the prophet and heed his words.

[Jim Sutherland]

@UM,....until we understand that we each are Multidimensional souls, living completely separate , living at the same Eternal Moment of NOW , at the same Time, , while connected to each physical body during each incarnation, we can never fully understand why, or how, our Astral bodies have completely different Agendas than our daily mundane, low Vibration physical bodies have, which are, tied to Gravity . I KNOW MY Astral body has a mind of its own, and operates outside of Jim’s Cage, and never tells Jim where it’s going, what it’s doing, after it returns from each adventure. So, it’s no surprise to me, that neither Faqir Chand, nor any of the other Masters knew where , or what their Astral bodies were doing, or who they are visiting, when out of body. These are Spiritual lessons I have learned out side of Sant Mat Philosophy, which are unknown, to most normal Sant Mat meditators. The Vale or Curtain is closed, every time the Astral body returns to the physical body, so is why the physical body can rarely remember where the Astral body just returned from, during its visits to other Realms. In Gurinder’s unusual case, the soul that he may have lived as, during one of his past lives, might have been a high profile Spiritual Master, that was living the same time as Charan, or Sawan Singh , or others. which could have been why Charan chose him as his best choice to succeed him, and not only keep RSSB operating, but keep the Physical Family Blood Line, whom he trusted, to keep RSSB alive. But no doubt, Gurinder’s Astral body, that still appears inside, to many of his Initiates , has a much different Agenda than his present physical body has, with his brain damaged from Chemo and Radiation treatment from his Throat Cancer. Gurinder might have been Whole, when Charan appointed him, but lost control of his body and Charan’s direction after being appointed. The Financial dealings are only part of his Leaving the Sant Mat Path. I hope he does spend some Jail Time, with the 5 already in Jail. Perhaps he will then find time to Meditate, and reconnect with Charan Singh for Renewed Spiritual Direction.
Jim Sutherland

[um]

@ Jim Sutherland
Thank you for your effort but what your write is beyond the world i experience and have experienced. Astral worlds and bodies are mere hearsay for me, things I used to imagine before but I have stopped doing so.

Whatever meaning spirituality had for me has left me like a person that loses contact with the movie in the cinema, waking up among onlookers no longer understanding why they are so emotionally about blots on the screen.

He ones said that "the pull must come from within" and later "if it is not there it is not there hat can you do?! …. He is right Jim, if it is not there it is not there and there is nothing one can do to alter it.

[Jim Sutherland]

@UM,......no doubt, it’s easier said than done, and most quit before they experience enough inner proof to motivate them to continue the course, I have almost quit, many times, but some thing has always happened, just enough, to pull me back. Charan’s Bulldozer Chain,...perhaps! But it’s a Lonely Path, where very few familiar friends are met inside. I don’t know most of the pseudo posters here , so don’t feel inclined to share any more than I already have, or casting my Pearls of Wisdom to swine. I have privately communicated with very few, that I have trusted enough to protect what we discussed confidentially. It’s funny, but that High I. Q. Group that just invited me to join is called the “ swines.” They take no prisoners, and fight for the swill slopped in to the trough.
Jim Sutherland

[Michael]

Jim
I KNOW MY Astral body has a mind of its own,

Great comment.