C-159. G-abduction
In addition to induction, in which a generality is inferred from a set of particulars, and deduction, in which a particular is inferred from a generality, both of which employ the inside-outside cognitive relation (X), there is abduction … in which from a set of particulars is hypostasized the antecedent condition(s) that might explain that set of particulars as in consequence (before-after relation, but not just sequential) conditions (Peirce).
The generality in the cases of induction and deduction is of the universal type, applicable to working with observed particulars*, such as we see in protocols of classification, conceptual usage (C-124) and in Merton’s “mid-range theories” of the limited coverage achieved for conceptualized behavioral relationships (C-17,19). We have, however, noted another kind of generality: those general persisting conditions (GPC) of the Nature of Things: partial order, consequentiality and discontinuity (III). Thus abduction can look back for potentially explanatory antecedents (and about, because they are a constant circumstance [II]) with a general and not just a particular mien.
This is what the R-protocol (C-151) of historical reductionism draws on to help provide a more complete and accurate picture of what has gone before any observed Course condition (C-139). It emphasizes a transverse, not just a cross-sectional, point of view and perspective for observations made of CEM-history (App. XI), and especially of the human Course with its future and not just a past.
With G-abduction the consequentiality of needed functionality, NF, and its centrality (C-144: the other “missing link”) come to the foreground. Needed functionality given the Nature of Things (III: e.g., C-38) suggests an explanation for the continuing, vexing behavioral problem (0:P; I:Pbeh; C-1) and for situational problems that require a prior solution to the behavioral problem (e.g., needed collective action) … and because, if Grasped, NF initiates Realization’s development processes to provide that needed functionality … and if fully Grasped could utilize the R-transform (C-111) and help us compose R-protocol technologies with which we can become more effective problem solvers – i.e., become R-entities (C-147) possessed of R-sense (C-128).
We have seen how crucial R development (i.e., C-110: What is called for [by NF]) is to our development of more than R-protocols. Together with composed protocols of Valuation (e.g., C-108,154-5) and of Language (e.g., App. XIV,XX; C-156), the three constitute the progress we have made -- and might and should yet make (C-156) – by introducing their respective transforms to the human Course.
* See footnote to C-153 re the affliction of particularitis, its genesis and consequences.
(c) 2016 R. F. Carter
The generality in the cases of induction and deduction is of the universal type, applicable to working with observed particulars*, such as we see in protocols of classification, conceptual usage (C-124) and in Merton’s “mid-range theories” of the limited coverage achieved for conceptualized behavioral relationships (C-17,19). We have, however, noted another kind of generality: those general persisting conditions (GPC) of the Nature of Things: partial order, consequentiality and discontinuity (III). Thus abduction can look back for potentially explanatory antecedents (and about, because they are a constant circumstance [II]) with a general and not just a particular mien.
This is what the R-protocol (C-151) of historical reductionism draws on to help provide a more complete and accurate picture of what has gone before any observed Course condition (C-139). It emphasizes a transverse, not just a cross-sectional, point of view and perspective for observations made of CEM-history (App. XI), and especially of the human Course with its future and not just a past.
With G-abduction the consequentiality of needed functionality, NF, and its centrality (C-144: the other “missing link”) come to the foreground. Needed functionality given the Nature of Things (III: e.g., C-38) suggests an explanation for the continuing, vexing behavioral problem (0:P; I:Pbeh; C-1) and for situational problems that require a prior solution to the behavioral problem (e.g., needed collective action) … and because, if Grasped, NF initiates Realization’s development processes to provide that needed functionality … and if fully Grasped could utilize the R-transform (C-111) and help us compose R-protocol technologies with which we can become more effective problem solvers – i.e., become R-entities (C-147) possessed of R-sense (C-128).
We have seen how crucial R development (i.e., C-110: What is called for [by NF]) is to our development of more than R-protocols. Together with composed protocols of Valuation (e.g., C-108,154-5) and of Language (e.g., App. XIV,XX; C-156), the three constitute the progress we have made -- and might and should yet make (C-156) – by introducing their respective transforms to the human Course.
* See footnote to C-153 re the affliction of particularitis, its genesis and consequences.
(c) 2016 R. F. Carter
S