Abstract
Suppose I happen to be looking out of the window and see round the comer a vehicle painted red speeding by, with a loud siren sounding. It is well known that, if a red vehicle is speeding and sounding a siren it is a fire-brigade hurrying to some fire. My conclusion that here is the fire-brigade hurrying off to some fire presents itself in quite an unintended manner, as my accidental apperception was unintended, too. This would be an example of spontaneous thinking. In this kind of thinking we make an inference without having in mind any pre-assigned aims to be achieved. On the other hand, our thinking may be directed by pre-assigned tasks, our inference may have an aim appointed in advance toward which it is to tend. For example, a schoolboy (the son of my neighbours) once asked me ta check whether or not he has solved his geometry problem correctly. In connection with this I began to doubt if it is really true that the sum of angles of a triangle is equal to a straight angle. I drew a triangle for myself and wondered how to make sure that the sum of the angles of a triangle is really 180°, how to infer it by means of what remained in my memory of geometry.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
It should be mentioned that the word ‘hypothesis’ can be understood in a number of ways. The meaning indicated here is that used in science. In the humanities it is often used in a broader meaning. Hypothesis there is defined as a statement which does not possess a satisfactory basis in the given branch of learning, and which is considered as an answer to some question which has arisen in research, not only to the question ‘why’. In other cases the word ‘hypothesis’ is used to define every statement verifiable only indirectly. There is also a distinction made between hypotheses explaining general regularities and ‘historical hypotheses’ explaining one particular fact, for example, in a court case.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1976 Springer Science+Business Media Dordrecht
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Ziembiński, Z. (1976). Thinking With Pre-Assigned Tasks. In: Practical Logic. Springer, Dordrecht. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-5604-4_15
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-017-5604-4_15
Publisher Name: Springer, Dordrecht
Print ISBN: 978-94-017-5589-4
Online ISBN: 978-94-017-5604-4
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive