We make our arguments abductively, and presuppositionally.

What views do you hold prior to approaching a situation? Since most of us probably use abductive reasoning to determine, interpret, and understand, many of our circumstances from the time we are very young, we are almost certain to have a makeshift system of understanding that works for making sensible our situations and our events, but not for others in similar, or even different, situations and events.

Aristotlean physics, the physics of the ancient and of the medieval world, taught that thought rocks fell to the earth because the earth was the center of the universe and things made from the earth, such as rocks, wished to return to their center. This was a widespread and widely held-to-be-scientific belief for many centuries, in Western culture.

Even though we know this claim to be patently false in light of today’s knowledge and understanding of gravity, yet if one of us throws a rock today it will indeed fall to the ground, both in Aristotle’s day, and in our day. This shows how a conceptual framework may be misleading even if we suppose ourselves to have indelible empirical knowledge of its truth.

We fail to identify the presuppositionally assumed (inferential) truth, that our explanation of a given event is initially taken to be true abductively, so that we eventually assume it was taken to be true deductively. When we presume upon reality and upon others to offer a truth which is deductive (a certainty,) when it’s really abductive (a hypothesis,) we contribute to the widespread confusion of ideas, events, cultures, and priorities, that already exists on Planet Earth, and we become the cause of our own troubles, alienating ourselves from the good.