Interpretation through analysis

Analysis implies that the premise of the analysis, and some of the connections, or association paths, that lead to this premise, are actualised in or mind.

The premise of the analysis is created as a conclusion of an earlier synthesis. The premises of the synthesis hence imply earlier premises of the analysis.

As not all of the earlier premises are used during the analysis, the credibility of its conclusion may vary.

When I perceive the phenomenon shown below, analysis implies that I search in memory after similar phenomena.

In case I synthesise the appearance of the phenomenon with the concept "hangs from a tree" and "sweet odour", I may draw the conclusion that all information I have is enclosed in my concept fruit.

But if I synthesise the appearance with the concepts (dug up from the ground" and "no odour" I may form the conclusion that it shares additional properties with my concept vegetable, or (in worst case) my concept insect.

At the page Abstraction it was discussed that we ignore some properties when we abstract a concept.

During analysis we advance from a more abstract concept to at least one that is less abstract. This implies that we add, or fill, the abstracted concept with properties that we have experience from.

And as some of the premises were eliminated during the abstraction, the conclusion or interpretation may become subjective.

Analysis of the concept "gold" for one person may result in expensive, yellow metal. Another may infer kings crown, jewellery, ring, and yet another may infer seat, dirt, mining shaft and controllers.

The analysis result becomes an interpretation which, for good and for bad, implies a very important part of our cognition and communication

Socrates (again!)

At the page Analysis an example about Socrates was mentioned:

Socrates is happy

One possible conclusion was that Socrates is in love. But was it maybe some completely different type of happiness that Socrates felt? Maybe it was happiness created by having expressed a not unveiled sophism. like "what is happiness in itself?" [compare Meno 100b or Phaedo 74a-b].

Hence interpretation problems may arise during analysis of an abstracted concept that is not thoroughly defined.

Politics

An example of interpretation was provided by a political party in Stockholm at about 1980.

Environmental problems due to car exhausts gave an opinion that asked for reduced motoring at the streets of the city, and was supported in media by the local parties.

But at least one party meant with the term "reduced motoring", not that the total number of cars in the city should be reduced, but that the highest pressure of traffic during rush hours should be reduced by flexible working hours.

Additional interpretation problems are revealed during analysis of still more abstracted concepts like in the concept taxonomy at the page Abstraction. The last abstraction in the taxonomy "everything imaginable" may be analysed into arbitrary subconcepts, among others into them that contributed to the abstraction; "all phenomena and free phantasies".

In a similar manner the concept "The Whole" may be analysed to "every imaginable argument about perfection and benevolence towards humans".

But it may also be interpreted in terms of enormous power and benevolence towards beings of an extra-terrestrial civilisation that wants to use the earth's inhabitants as a nutritional source.

In the book The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy, the author Douglas Adams described the purpose of humankind:

Evolution of life on Earth was consciously initiated by a very distant civilisation in order to increase transfer speed of their insignificant message ("Greetings") to another civilisation.