Introduction to Terminology

"The Roots of Sound Rational Thinking" is the title of an eight part book written and copyrighted by Virginia Vallee (pen name). Two parts (24 chapters) are on line. More will be added as time permits. This book is a simple, yet penetrating, study that explores elemental rational values from an affirmative, inclusive, speculative viewpoint that is both similar to and different from other approaches. Hopefully you can find something that will help you in your own suppositions.

The theory of rational thinking presented herein is called Plusroot Theory.

Plusroot Theory is an articulated, affirmative version of the basic requirements of sound rational thinking from an Affirmative Rational point of view. See Affirmative Essay for a definition and explanation of Affirmative Rationality.

Simple: Plusroot Theory is simple because it investigates fundamentals in plain words.

Penetrating: Plusroot Theory is penetrating because it explores deep problems with thoughtful consideration.

The thesis of Plusroot Theory is that:

1. The most feasible way to advance our abilities to progress in peace is to adequately promote the basic requirements of sound rational thinking;

Throughout this study, the terms ‘root’ and ‘elemental’ refer to rational values that exist beneath first intensional or First Order opinion and knowledge.

Root is a metaphor suggesting elemental rational values. Root theory and elemental rationality are generic terms which include grammar, logic, rhetoric, dialectic, epistemology, semantics, linguistics, some math and other subjects that deal with rational form and rational rules.

The term 'elemental' used herein refers to the elements of rational thinking. Root is a metaphor that refers to the elements of rational thinking.

The elemental, affirmative rational theory advocated herein and in the book, "The Roots of Sound Rational Thinking", aims to be inclusive, normal, mainstay, nonpartisan and such. For a name, it is Plusroot Theory.

Plusroot Theory promotes traditional affirmative guidelines of sound rational thinking. It concludes that we can improve society by boosting root verities (elemental rational truths) and correcting root errors (elemental rational mistakes). Plusroot Theory expresses in words what many people refer to as ‘commonsense’.

The term 'affirmative' refers to that which adequately supports the basic requirements of sound rational thinking. Affirmative aims to be good enough for the occasion but does not claim to be absolute. Only an absolute being can be absolute. Humans are not absolute beings.

Plusroot Theory defines, explains and presupposes a distinction between the ideas "authentic" and "affirmative". Most people understand the difference intuitively but usually do not talk about it. It is one of those rational presupposition people generally take for granted and rarely discuss.

Authentic: Authentic is an adjective designating values, information and laws that are true, proper, and sustained independent of our knowledge of them.

Commonsense Sorting Mentality: Commonsense Sorting Mentality or ‘Affirmative Rational Sorting Mentality’ are terms that refer to appraisals and discourse that adequately uses basic requirements of sound rational thinking as a criteria to sift and screen values encountered in reading and in transactions with others so as to bring out the better and set aside the lesser in building up our body of knowledge.

Commonsense Sorting Mentality is an inclusive, speculative approach that acknowledges the limits of human knowledge while holding a deep respect for the majesty and power of Impartial Truth. A Commonsense Sorting Mentality seeks for realistic improvements within the realm of human possibilities.

Commonsense Sorting Mentality is not new. Many people throughout history have endorsed affirmative rational sorting methods of this type -- although they didn’t use this name or explain it in the same way.

In the Commonsense Sorting point of view, effect is important but it is the opposite of those ‘expedient intrigues’ that use "effect" as an excuse to violate the requirements of right reason to defeat their opponent.

Commonsense sorting of values is different in kind from the negative technique of stacking statistics and slanting presentations. The former adequately respects and uses the basic requirements of sound rational thinking whereas the latter manipulates the requirements of reason to suit desired conclusions. There is a radical difference between these two points of view.

Negative: The term 'negative' as used herein, refers to remarks, implications, theories tactics and trends that significantly deviate from the basic requirements of sound rational thinking. 'Negative’ is an umbrella term for thoughts and procedures that impede affirmative rational procedures. Negative ranges from small pin pricks to radical dialectical revolutions. I sometimes capitalize Negative to indicate this meaning. Sometimes I write ‘root negative’ to indicate the negation of affirmative root values.

Divergent: The term 'negative' is clear, concise and is a natural antonym for 'affirmative'. However, negative has many adverse connotations that might prejudice judgment. 'Divergent' is a less provocative word that can serve the same purpose. Consequently, I often use the term 'divergent' to name that which is a significant negation of affirmative rational suppositions. Capitalizing Divergent helps indicate this meaning.

Divergent operational procedures deviate in significant ways from affirmative requirements of sound rational thinking. There are many ways to significantly diverge from sound rational thinking.

As said, there are many ways of being Divergent. Each rational Divergence is a root error [as defined] and creates a distinct and separate problem. There are many elemental root problems that severely hinder progress. To address these root problems intelligently we need to talk about them. To talk about them, we need terminology. Some terms are mentioned below. For more see Negative Essay.

Spurious: Spurious refers to procedures, thoughts, tenets, and themes that circumvent the authentic and confound the affirmative. Spurious lacks authenticity or validity. It is not genuine.

Specious: Specious refers to reasoning that has a ring of truth but actually is fallacious. It is an argument that sounds plausible and attractive on the surface but in reality is deceptive.

Sophistic: Sophistic is a refined approach that tries to appear sound but is really fallacious.

Minus: The term minus designates specific propositions that are spurious, that is to say, negative from a Plus affirmative point of view.

Counter Root: Counter Root refers to ideologies, doctrines, and presentations that critically countenance a collection of root errors serious enough to drag down and even obstruct civil discourse. Counter root, in some significant manner, reverses affirmative requirements of sound rational thinking. Modern Counter Root refers to the Radical Root Divergence that began coming into prominence with the theories of Kant, Hegel, Marx, Sorel and like-minded ideologists.

See Negative Essay for more. There are many ways of diverging from affirmative rationality. There are many ways of being root negative.

Personal Note [2005]: I am still searching for terminology to designate various Negative Root operations that obstruct Affirmative Rational Development. If I find a terms more user friendly than Divergent and Counter Root, I plan to replace them. Any suggestions?

Divergent: The term 'negative' is clear, concise and is a natural antonym for 'affirmative'. However, negative has many adverse connotations that might prejudice judgment. 'Divergent' is a less provocative word that can serve the same purpose. Consequently, the erms 'divergent' or 'root divergent' are often used herein to name that which is the negation of affirmative rational methods.

Divergent rational procedures deviate in significant ways from affirmative requirements of sound rational thinking.

In rational philosophy there are many ways of being divergent. To promote sound rational thinking, we need to reduce the destructive impact of radically divergent root procedures. To do this we need terms to refer to distinctly different problems. Some root negative terms are mentioned below. For more see Negative Essay.

Spurious refers to procedures, thoughts, tenets, and themes that circumvent the authentic and confound the affirmative. Spurious lacks authenticity or validity. It is not genuine.

Specious: Specious refers to reasoning that has a ring of truth but actually is fallacious. It is an argument that sounds plausible and attractive on the surface but in reality is deceptive.

Sophistic is a high toned approach that tries to appear sound but is really fallacious.

Minus: The term minus designates specific propositions that are spurious, that is to say, negative from a Plus affirmative point of view.

Crosscurrent: Crosscurrent refers to ideologies, presentations and other theories that, from a Plus Root point of view, countenance a collection of root errors serious enough to drag down and even obstruct civil discourse, block scientific advancement and thwart our abilities to progress in peace.

Counter Root: Counter Root is another name for crosscurrent methods and maneuvers that occur in society at all levels of thinking. Counter root, in some significant manner, reverses affirmative requirements of sound rational thinking. Counter root can refer to a single root error, a radical dialectic or various negative views in between. Modern Counter Root refers to the New Think ideology that began coming into prominance with the theories of Kant, Hegel, Marx and like-minded ideologists.

See Negative Essay for more. There are many ways of being negative.

Most of the philosophies and methodologies we encounter in our modern world are a bewildering mixture of affirmative root values and divergent operating procedures. Affirmative and divergent vacillate in varying degrees as the wind blows.

Affirmative is good enough but not absolute. This means that the affirmative rational approach can absorb a limited amount of divergent ideology without losing its basic fellowship. However, at a certain degree of accumulation, divergent procedures begin to dominate. If this happens disharmony sets in and feelings of fellowship dwindle. When discord reaches a critical point, interaction moves outside the realm of civility and into the realm of hostility. Interplay turns into retaliatory confrontation. Interaction becomes polarized into a rancorous win/loose conflict. [See Strange Mix Essay]

'Elemental rational theory' in the Plus Root Theory, is a term for theories about subjects that underlie surface discourse. Elemental rational subjects include epistemology, logic, rhetoric, semantics, linguistics, some aspects of math and aspects of other subjects insofar as they deal with logical and epistemological suppositions.

Root verities are affirmative judgments about elemental rational theory. That is to say, root verities are elemental rational values that are adequately authentic for the occasion. Root verities do not claim to be absolutely true but they are good enough to meet the needs of the occasion. In high tech situations being good enough requires people to meet very high standards. Good enough does not mean sloppy.

Root verities are concerned with true and false, right and wrong, good and bad. Root verities, being values, carry with them the implication that we should seek them and work to promote them.

Plus Root Theory contends that we should nurture root verities in our systems of belief. The big challenge lies in learning to distinguish verities from errors. This last process is not simple and requires thoughtful consideration and much study.

Although there is a gap between a root verity and an authentic root value [see Authentic], we humans, with proper diligence, can ascertain basic root verities adequately for the occasion. Affirmative judgments do not claim absolute perfection but they do claim to be good enough for the occasion. [See Chapter 21 Q-Gap]

Root errors are judgments about elemental rational issues that are insufficient for the occasion. They are epistemic, logical, rhetorical, semantic, linguistic, etc. mistakes. They are elemental blunders. They are spurious elemental rational assumptions.

The term 'root error' refers to incorrect, insufficient, or misleading assumptions or statements about elemental rational guidelines accepted as if the assumptions were true.

Root errors can be viewed as incorrect answers to questions-about-thinking.

Since a root error is a failure to employ a root verity, it follows that root errors and root verities are different sides of the same coin. Root errors are blunders in elemental rational matters.

As with root verities, there is a gap between what we designate to be a root error and what actually is an elemental mistake. To be open minded and balanced we need to stay modest about our own judgments.

A critical study of root values is commonly called logic and/or epistemology. The terms ‘elemental’ and 'elemental rationality' as used herein include logic and epistemology and other subjects that deal with forms and assumptions presupposed by more surface subjects. "Root" is a metaphor for elemental rationality.

Logic: Logic aims to distinguish valid from invalid and to express the requirements of sound rational thinking. Logicians ask: "Is the reasoning sound?"

Epistemology: The business of epistemology is to examine the relations of knowledge, thinking, understanding and truth. The epistemologist seeks to understand the suppositions that underlie logic. Epistemology asks: "Are we justified in making a distinction between valid and invalid?" "What is reason?" "Is it possible for us to know anything with absolute certainty?"

Epistemology and logic are sister sciences, but epistemology goes deeper than logic.

Epistemology and logic are mutually interdependent. However, sometimes people develop a passable logical system while espousing a distorted epistemology and vice versa. This creates numerous problems for both epistemology and logic.

Many professionals handle high tech elemental questions with skill but compromise their ideas by making simple elemental mistakes. Bertrand Russell, for one, broke ground in mathematical logic. His Principia Mathematica has very few blatant mathematical errors. However, in his other writings, Russell makes dangerous elemental rational blunders time after time. Russell is meticulous in mathematical details, but stumbles in basic matters, such as his use of the word ‘truth’.

If research in root thinking were purely academic, ludicrous mistakes would be a source of fun and give us all a laugh. However, these errors are not benign. Elemental rational mistakes perpetuated by persons of influence lower the caliber of rational style. Low caliber rational style damages the abilities of societies to negotiate conflict and harms our capacity to build a safe and sane world.

Logic and epistemology interact with each other so intimately that their roots become one subject. Grammar, rhetoric, semantics, linguistics, dialectics, etc. connect with logic and epistemology. All of these subjects deal with elemental matters. Plus Root Theory uses the terms ‘elemental’ and ‘root’ as generic terms to refer to all studies that underlie and support first intensional (above root or stematic) discourse. (Root is a metaphor for elemental). Stematic discourse of the first intension. Most of our discourse is first intensional. 'Elemental' and 'root' thinking are second intensional. Plus Root Theory is primarily concerned with second intensional problems.

Root theories come in various levels of consciousness. Plus Root Theory puts strong emphasis on the importance of these levels. For convenience they are divided intellectually into four groups.

A project that aims to improve society by promoting elemental rational verities (root verities) and correcting elemental blunders (root errors) raises two important questions.

1. How do we tell which propositions are verities and which are mistakes?

2. How do we make corrections?

This book addresses these problems by placing emphasis on the importance of sound judgment in both major and minor premises as well as valid deduction in reasoning and adequate definitions. Following this general plan as well as other basic guidelines of right reason, eventually a bigger picture comes into view.

It takes time to develop the big picture. Such a large number of issues are involved that we cannot say everything at once. Each problem must be addressed in its own way.

In discussing root values, complexity challenges us at every step.

Complex: Being numerous, mixed, interconnected, paradoxical, elusive, and split by contradictions, addressing any one root error in context soon becomes prolix and confusing.

Boring: To further complicate the issue, many people view logic and epistemology as trivial and/or boring.

Ergo: As a result few volunteer to do the work required to fix elemental rational mistakes. The vast majority of people allow deep devastating errors to slide along year after year, generation after generation. Being unchecked, root errors that start small grow into major problems.

Root Errors (elemental rational blunders) do not always become calamities. Often enough, they look trivial and remain trivial and cause only minor inconvenience. We have our candid commonsense to counteract and override elemental goof ups.

Candid Commonsense, as defined herein, is human intellectual ability to intuit basic requirements of sound rational thinking, bring theses requirements into liminal (work-a-day) consciousness, use these guidelines to make sound judgments, reason validly, and apply conclusions to matters at hand in an honest manner.

Cultivated commonsense is polished, candid commonsense people developed through active cooperation with a well-formed learning program.

Many people in the world today have cultivated commonsense. Often cultivated commonsense prevents dangerous ideologies from growing into odious, totalitarian regimes.

However, even when monitored by commonsense, elemental inaccuracies (root errors) still damage our intellectual life, sometimes in unexpected ways. The more we repair root errors, the better off we will be, especially if we learn how to identify and adequately correct mistakes that are most apt to set the stage for the growth of injurious ideologies.

Theory: A theory is a collection of connected tenets that become themes joined with a general thesis.

Often a large number of themes, explicit and implicit, are contained in one theory. For example, Plus Root Theory consists of hundreds of themes, many of which are expressed in this writing as Plus tenets. A theme is a thought used as a continuous thread in a theory.

Ideology: An ideology is a theory of ideas about ideas. It is a collection of themes presented and often accepted as a whole package.

Because so many thoughts are involved, almost all ideologies contain one to several minus themes mixed with Plus affirmations. Actual ideologies we encounter in the intellectual world are almost always a mix of affirmative and negative.

In this study, ideologies are evaluated in terms of the trends that hold sway.

Affirmative Ideology: An ideology that is dominated by affirmative root themes and is directed towards developing sound rational thinking is an affirmative ideology.

Negative or Divergent or Sophistic or Counter Root Ideology: An ideology dominated by spurious root themes that tend to weaken commitment to sound rational thinking is a negative or divergent or sophistic or counter root ideology. There are many ways of being negative. In due time, Plus Root Theory will address different negative themes and ideologies that have gained a power grip in modern society.

Dialectic: Dialectic, in the modern sense, is a process of interchange that incorporates an ideology into a process of acquiring power. It is a combination of theory and practice interacting in specific instances and in the events of history. Various dialectical movements incorporate an assortment of ideological theories. An ideology in practice becomes a dialectical system.

Dialectic and ideology are companions.

Affirmative Dialectic: A dialectical system based on predominantly affirmative themes is an affirmative dialectic.

Negative Dialectic: A dialectic dominated by spurious root themes is a negative dialectic. Spurious root themes create a tendency toward excuse, elitism and totalitarian thinking.

Mix: Most dialectics we encounter in our modern world are a bewildering mixture of affirmative and negative which vacillate in varying degrees as the wind blows. These are marginal and mixed dialectics. Since the issues involved are complex, manipulative dialectics can become masterpieces of intrigue.

A major problem in elemental rational theory is discovering which propositions are reliable and which are unreliable. Knowing which is which is important because one serious root error (elemental mistake) can send an epistemological enterprise in the wrong direction and frustrate our abilities to progress in peace.

Plus Root Theory aims to address this problem. The Plus sorting method examines elemental propositions individually using a well-formed affirmative theory that has been tested over and over in experience.

Throughout this study, Plus evaluation is used to explain and defend Plus Root Theory. The solution to the redundancies and paradoxes involved will become clearer as explanations develop. [See redundancy and paradox essays]

It is easy to make a root error (elemental rational mistake) but exceedingly difficult to correct it.

Fabricating root errors takes very little space and only a blink of time.

Adequately correcting root errors can take thousands of hours and thousands of pages.

We can make serious root errors in seconds and quickly bury them out of sight in a labyrinth of material on other subjects.

Although correcting a root error in our own mind is often simple, correcting a root error embedded in the style of a society is a different matter.

The ease with which root errors are perpetuated verses the extreme difficulty of correcting them erects an enormous impediment to up grading the rational style of society. Because of the difficulties involved, many people have developed an aversion to the study of logic that blocks the way of those who wish to defend the simple basic requirements of sound rational thinking.

The Plus Root method encourages an optimistic attitude.

While maintaining that absolute perfection is beyond our reach, Plus affirmative philosophy holds that we have the ability to refine our rational skills enough to meet the problems at hand and that is what we really need.

Recognizing our limits is not an excuse for sloppy thinking. To be good enough to meet the challenges of our technical society, we need to be very good.

Contrariwise, it is negative ideologies that encourage sloppy thinking. When our attempts at negotiation fail, its not because we are too reasonable. Instead we are not reasonable enough.

Plus Root Theory is value based. As an introduction, it holds the following basic values:

1. Affirmative elemental rational theory is better than bogus elemental rational theory.
2. Clear understanding is better than mystification.
3. Truth is better than illusion.
4. Sound rational thinking is better than unsound rational thinking.
5. Affirmative ideology is better than negative ideology.
6. Fair play is better than foul fighting.
7. Good will is better than hostile alienation.
8. Candid civil discourse is better than cunning antagonistic manipulation.
9. Wise priorities are better than foolish indulgence.

Plus Root Theory affirms and supports the above values and, at the same time avoids the pit falls of absolutism by the very simple solution of recognizing the distinction between Impartial Truth and human knowledge and by recognizing differences among major premise, minor premise and conclusion.

An Affirmative Sorting Mentality assumes we humans have the ability to bring positive values into realization even if only a small step at a time. From this point of view, the Plus interpretation is a value theory. It discusses what we "should" do rather than attempting to merely describe what we "do" do.

Plus Root Theory emphasizes that values are values because they are measured against something. The Plus Root version uses as a long range measuring standard "our abilities to progress in peace." This is not the only measuring rod in Plus Root Theory, but it is one that can itself be measured. Because it can be measured, it is valuable from a technical point of view.

The affirmative outlook presented in this book is not original. Most affirmative tenets promoted herein have been supported, at least implicitly, by vast numbers of people since the beginning of philosophy.

To be up to date, many tenets have been refurbished to meet modern needs and to incorporate scientific discoveries. The discussions involving Balanced Realism are a case in point.

Possibly a few aspects of Plus Root Theory as presented in this book are original but vestiges of the affirmative sorting mentality can be discovered through eons of written history. Aristotle discusses the difference between fair play and foul fighting, Cicero refers to plus value and minus value (in Greek and Latin, of course).

Often in the past, Plus Root ideas were there implicitly but not explicitly acknowledged.

Reasoning based on Plus tenets is what people, more often than not, mean when they speak of common sense.

Although this study is long, it is still only an introduction to the topics under discussion. This is because the subject of elemental rational theory is even more complex than math, physics, and chemistry combined.

The Plus Root Theory developed herein aims to be as plain spoken as possible but, the number of issues involved is huge.

There is no short way to truthfully address today’s needs. The reason why this is so should become clear as problems unfold and answers fall in place.