Hypothetical

Hypothetical Situations

There are physical "tools", like a hammer or screwdriver, and there are more abstract tools, like mathematics. One of the most valuable "mental tools" for me has always been the "hypothetical situation." I am defining a "hypothetical situation" as a situation defined not by reality but by one or more persons, for the purpose of examining ideas. The KEY attribute of a hypothetical situation is that, unlike the "real" world, all the variables can be defined and controlled, or altered and re-defined at will, since the hypothetical situation exists only in the form of ideas.

It is important to note that while more than one person can participate in the creation and modification of a hypothetical situation, all must agree on the attributes of the given situation throughout the process in order for the tool to function effectively. For example, if I say, "Imagine a city where everyone can fly," and you say to yourself, "That's ridiculous -- in MY imagined city, no one can fly," then the process has broken down, and we are dealing with two DIFFERENT hypothetical situations -- which has some value, but not for mutually examining ideas together.

Actually, I find that hypothetical situations are becoming less and less useful, and one of the reasons is that many people fail to grasp the basic concept that ALL of the parameters of the situation are user-defined. If I say, "Imagine that you could instantly transport yourself between locations. How fast could you get to the grocery store?" many people will respond, "Well, it takes me about twenty minutes to drive to the grocery store," since they deem the entire hypothesis "unrealistic." One of the POINTS of a hypothetical situation is that it does not have to comply with currently-understood principles of reality; only the realities defined in the hypothetical situation.

In my opinion, though, the KEY reason that hypothetical situations are becoming less and less useful is that we are becoming so polarized and opinionated that we are afraid to examine abstract ideas, for fear we will come upon conclusions that contradict our ideas about the "real" world. For example, if I say, "Let's examine a hypothetical middle-eastern country," then many, if not most people are instantly suspicious of what ideas I am trying to promote. As I go on to define my hypothetical country, they try to decide what country I am "really" talking about -- maybe Iraq, maybe Iran, maybe Israel. Their ideas about these "real" countries, and their ideas about WHICH country I am "really" talking about dramatically color their thoughts about my "hypothetical" country, losing most of the benefits possible from using a "hypothetical" situation.

It's all very sad. We are either incapable or unwilling to examine ideas which might somehow reflect badly on the ideas that we already embrace. I'm not sure whether "incapable" or "unwilling" is the greater tragedy.