Pathology of Thinking and the Necessity of Adhering to Demonstration
“The most important lesson to be learned from logic and philosophy is the art of demonstration.”
Dr. Fanaei Eshkevari, in response to a student’s question in a philosophy class about the most critical aspect of engaging with philosophy, stated the following:
The most important lesson to be learned from logic and philosophy is the art of demonstration. If someone fails to master this skill, they have not truly benefited from philosophy. Unfortunately, many who spend years studying logic and philosophy do not, in practice, develop a demonstrative mind.For years, I have been teaching and studying in the fields of philosophy, theology, and rational sciences in general. In books, classroom discussions, or debates outside of class, I often observe that individuals appear to be engaging in rational argumentation, but in reality, most of their arguments are dialectical, rhetorical, based solely on common opinions (widely accepted beliefs without logical support), or fallacious. There is much noise in these discussions, but they rarely yield genuinely rational outcomes.
Every group—whether academic, seminary-based, or belonging to various intellectual movements—has its own set of common opinions: propositions they consider more certain than any demonstration, yet these beliefs are often shaped merely by popularity, suggestion, indoctrination, or imitation, and have become dogmatically entrenched. A great deal of energy is spent trying to make people understand that the certainties they use in the premises of their arguments are often baseless, rooted solely in collective mental habits, and overcoming this is extremely challenging.
What is truly essential is cultivating a demonstrative mind. Recognizing formal fallacies (errors in the structure of an argument) is relatively simpler, but the main problem lies in material fallacies—errors in the content or substance of an argument, where uncertain matters are mistaken for certainties.
The primary task of reason in demonstrative thinking is precision: thinking and speaking demonstratively (with clarity and without ambiguity). The most critical point in this process is distinguishing between certainties and non-certainties (not accepting every claim merely because it is widespread or feels certain).
In this journey, we owe the greatest debt to two monumental philosophers: Aristotle (the founder of formal logic) in his *Organon* (particularly in the *Posterior Analytics*) and the great Avicenna, who, in the *Book of Demonstration* from his *Logic of the Shifa*, provides the most profound and precise teachings on demonstrative thinking. Avicenna is a master teacher of thought. The most precise text for learning how to think is the *Book of Demonstration* from the *Shifa*, which teaches both the structure of arguments and the meticulous distinction between certainties and non-certainties.
In the modern era, significant work has also been done in this area, which must be studied carefully. What is known as *critical thinking* has identified over a hundred types of fallacies, and paying attention to them is highly important and beneficial.
What I have described pertains to the circles of rational sciences, where one would expect demonstration to be the standard. However, when we move to other domains, especially in political and social discussions, there is often no governing criterion at all, and true thinking is rarely seen. People mistake their rhetorical or writing skills for the power of thought. These are two different things: the art of rhetoric is distinct from the art of thinking.
Demonstrative thinking is the only way to escape sophistry and fallacy. As long as minds remain captive to common opinions and mental habits, even an abundance of philosophical knowledge will not lead to genuine thinking. Therefore, practicing demonstration must be prioritized, both in individual thought and in collective discussions.