• Connotation vs. Denotation
Connotation refers to that which is implied or suggested by a word or phrase. Denotation refers to the literal interpretation or explicit meaning of a word or phrase. For example, “Ray drives a BMW” denotes that (if the statement is true) Ray owns a German automobile. It connotes that Ray is at least moderately affluent.
Labels we give ourselves can carry both denotative and connotative meanings and implications as well. For example, if Ray says he is an “atheist,” that label denotes that his worldview (whatever it might be) lacks a belief in a god or gods. The “atheist” label might connote that Ray doesn’t go to church, or doesn’t believe in an afterlife or in anything “supernatural.” But here’s where we need to be careful.
There is a difference between connotation and assumption. There are those who assume that being an atheist means one has no morals, when that’s actually far from the truth. Likewise, one can assume that being a “Christian” means one believes in a literal six-day creation, or denies evolution, or hates homosexuals, but that’s not necessarily true either. While that may be true for many Christians, there are many others for whom such connotation is simply untrue. This leads to the next point:
• Assumptions vs. Conclusions
An assumption is a premise accepted without evidence (or without bothering to look for evidence) to support it. A conclusion is a premise backed up by other premises which attempt to support it. Bottom line is: whenever possible, don’t assume. Look for the data. Do your homework.
• Necessary vs. Sufficient
A necessary condition is a condition which must be satisfied in order to produce X (whatever X might be). A sufficient condition is a condition which guarantees to produce X. Simply put, a necessary condition is needed or required for X, whereas a sufficient condition is enough to produce X. Not every sufficient condition is necessary, and not every necessary condition is sufficient.
For example, let’s say X is fire. The necessary conditions to produce fire are: enough oxygen, enough heat, and enough fuel (i.e., something to burn). Take any one of these three necessary conditions away, and there is no fire. Heat + fuel without oxygen = no fire; fuel + oxygen without heat = no fire, and so on. Each condition is required, thus making them necessary. The three necessary conditions together (oxygen + heat + fuel) make a sufficient condition to produce fire.
Understanding the distinction between necessary and sufficient conditions isn’t merely crucial for its own sake, but it helps us understand the role of reason in the process of critical thinking. Critical thinkers, to borrow Christopher Hitchens’ words, “do not rely solely upon science and reason, because these are necessary rather than sufficient factors, but we distrust anything that contradicts science or outrages reason.” I have been asked whether I think reason (or “human reason” as some like to call it) is the “only way” we can know truth. What they’re asking is whether I think reason is sufficient. I answer the same way every time: I tell them I don’t know, because, well, I really don’t know.
Sometimes this line of questioning is prompted by the desire to make room for “revelation” or “faith” as a means of discovering truth, equal to – and in some cases superior to – logic and reason. The problem is that reason often becomes neglected, misused, or discarded entirely. No, I do not say reason is “all you need.” All I will say with confidence is that reason is a necessary condition for finding truth, and to ignore it or attempt to bend it to our will rather than allowing it to lead us to greater understanding is to regress rather than progress.
Dead-Logic 