Thinking and not thinking

One of the problems with thinking these days is that many people don’t seem to know the difference between axioms, conclusions and hypotheses.  An axiom is a postulate that at least the proponent accepts as true.  The most famous axiom, of course, is “We hold these truths to be self-evident...”  Being self evident, they are not capable of argument.  A conclusion is a result derived by the use of logic predicated on the axiom.  A hypothesis is an assumption which can be proved or disproved by evidence or experimentation.  Too often, people believe that their axioms are conclusions.  For example, when one argues that America, Israel, Russia or Iran is good or bad, that statement isn’t a conclusion, it is most likely an axiom.  The correct way to analyze the issue would be to set forth, as an axiom, those qualities that make a country good or bad.  Step two would be set up a hypothesis that the country is good or bad.  Finally, evidence or logic would be used to reach a conclusion.  For example, one might believe, as an axiom,  that a good country is one in which there are three coffee shops for every one hundred citizens. He could then hypothesize that Russia is a good country.  He would then count people, count coffee shops and divide people by coffee shops and reach a conclusion.  Many of us posit axioms as conclusions and then cherry pick reasons for that axiom believing that we have reasoned to a conclusion.  The important thing is to know starting points from end points.