Experiments work to show that that the concept is true or false. The argument here is that we cannot know if something has the possibility or impossibility unless they have determinants that can sufficiently prove so. The fact is based on empirical arguments as forwarded by various philosophers, in which we seek to explain things based on what we infer from experiments and happenings around us. The most fundamental aspects of it are that the sufficient determinants prove or disregard a point. The determinants are like tools in an experiment that seek to prove something. They must have all the relevant things needed for them to qualify as sufficient determinants. Therefore, with the mind, sufficient determination is vital for the proof in experiments of our thoughts. The writer was inferring to the ability of the human mind to be sure about a concept before it can dwell upon it. People think all the time and use those thoughts to make arguments that determine how they behave and react to concepts. The thoughts, most often, are based on mere theories that are not sufficiently based on any forms of experiments. As a result, the things we infer that result from our thoughts might not reflect on the accuracy of a particular concept. The reason is that our thoughts are not premised on anything that has the possibility of being sufficient to warrant the conclusion about the concept. In this case, sufficient refers to the evidentiary part of the things we think about. We have to provide evidence of the sufficiency of our thoughts based on the concept that our thoughts implore. For instance, one has to tell why they think that the world is round, and provide sufficient evidence on why they led their thoughts to believe or think so.
The challenge in such an argument is that it is impossible to substantially determine the sufficiency of thoughts. Thoughts are fuelled by many things, among them how people feel, the environment around them and the knowledge they acquire from the people around them. As such, it becomes impossible to determine if their thoughts have the sufficient possibility or impossibility in determining what they have. Again, human thoughts are based on other human thoughts. People think about concepts in terms of what others have thought on them. The independence of the mind is highly disregarded because most arguments are influenced by many factors, among which are people’s thoughts. In addition, arguments can be coaxed by other factors that are sufficient determinants of thoughts but exist outside of them. For example, societal notions and norms may influence how a person perceives certain things and how they think about everything in the world. How then can one determine if the outside influences are sufficient determinants to the thoughts? It is a difficult concept to prove and is highlighted by other things around people. The environment, upbringing of a person and the people they are around all determine how they think about all the concepts in around (State Univ of New York, 5).The argument should be centered on determining whether people’s thoughts should be tested for sufficiency or if the sufficiency were based on the influences on their thoughts. The influences on a person’s thoughts are easy to determine because of their actual and tangible nature. The thoughts of people cannot exist on their own, and the things that make them exist are the ones that should be subject to the test on sufficiency. They are the determinants of the thoughts and should, therefore, pass the sufficiency test on their possibilities or impossibilities.
Work cited
Styles of Thought: Interpretation, Inquiry, and Imagination. State Univ of New York Pr, 2009. Print.
