ON THE METHODS OF ANALYSIS, HYPOTHESIS AND SYNTHESIS IN PHILOSOPHY

In the investigation of the truths of difficult things in philosophy it is always useful to employ the methods and techniques that are effective and useful for one's purposes. In philosophy the methods of analysis, hypothesis and synthesis should be developed by philosophers if they hope to make any progress in their endeavours. There are many useful methods and techniques that can be employed by philosophers as a means to figure out truths, but in general, rigour and objectivity are necessary components of any methods that are employed by philosophers. Philosophy is in a sense part subjective as well as value orientated and personal, but philosophy is also part objective, distinct and empirical, so one can say that Philosophy is the glue that binds all the knowledge together that we encounter in such a way as to make it intimate to us as human beings. Philosophy is a very human and vital discipline for our inner subjective needs and feelings unlike science and mathematics which are highly objective and impersonal disciplines. Philosophy is necessary to us as humans because it deals in all that is intimate and meaningful to us as living beings. Analysis in philosophy consists in making observations from our experiences as well as in conducting thought experiments in regard to the phenomenon of our experiences. One of the beauties of philosophy is that we can compare our findings from experience to that of other philosophers who have written on the subject or to the people we meet. In philosophical analysis our inferences and conclusions are arrived at by induction and deduction, for example, we conclude certain truths from their effects to their causes and certain causes invariably lead to specific effects whether universal or particular. In analysis we accept nothing as true that is not clear and distinct to the mind and the senses; if something can be doubted then it must be rejected as an invalid conclusion. Not all truths can be experienced through the senses, so all analytical inferences and conclusions cannot be arrived at by the use of the senses alone. Hypothesis, induction and logical inferences account for all the conclusions we arrive at that our senses cannot account for directly. To the Greeks analysis meant "a breaking up" or the process of "breaking up" a complex topic or problem into smaller manageable parts to gain a better understanding of it. In analysis we also proceed from the simple to the complex as well as revise our conclusions in a meticulous manner. All the causes and reasons of phenomenon and also all of their effects that are sought after to be understood must correspond to each of these phenomenon that we encounter in reality because each phenomenon must have an effect and an effect cannot be greater than or other than its cause. Also certain causes always lead to certain effects that are the logical results of specific behaviour or phenomenon.
Now hypothesis enables us to suppose or assume causes or reasons for phenomenon or things generally and so is a very useful tool. A hypothesis cannot be made into a working theory unless it has been made concrete and valid by observation, experiment or the use of reason. A hypothesis is only as useful and as valid as observation, experiment and logic make it, otherwise it becomes an incorrect and invalid inference. A hypothesis can also be made valid if it simply fits the phenomenon or event by the use of reason alone and is self evident as the solution or answer.
I mentioned also that all truths cannot be experienced directly through the senses, for example, the sub-quantum realm and the events prior to the big bang are examples of this, but there are many more etc. Seeing as though all phenomena and events cannot be experienced directly through the senses means that the methods of hypothesis as well a certain kind of reasoning is necessary to arrive at truths concerning them; this certain type of reasoning for things that transcend our senses is what Immanuel Kant called transcendental logic and the things which our senses cannot experience directly that are aspects of reality he called the thing-in-itself or things as they are in themselves. A desire for truth is a desire not to delude oneself concerning the nature of things and the ability to constantly attain to a knowledge of the truth is aided by sound methods and techniques as well as in a diligent use of them. Methods and techniques are an efficient and useful way to figure things out as opposed to simply guessing or bumbling along until answers are found.
If in the analysis and breaking up of a problem into its constituent parts we encounter unknown elements (variables), it is simply because there are things that we have not accounted for in our analysis; these unknown elements need to be resolved so that our analysis can be complete. Even a subjective truth can be explained analytically and so in a sense can be explained in such a way as to seem scientific and rational. Anything that is not subject to analysis is not a truth. There are philosophers who are content for philosophy to remain subjective, mysterious, unexplainable and circular, who prefer to live in a personal and deluded haze and condition in which they propound the idea that what is true for them is not what is true for you and so on.
Deductive reasoning it can be shown is the aspect of analysis that is most used in dialectic philosophy because it is the aspect of analysis that is creative and that also leads to synthesis (in its traditional meaning) and also all kinds of inferences, whereas induction mostly discovers pre-existent universal truths and is therefore more useful in metaphysics and science. Synthesis consists in following causes and other inferences to there correct places in the sense of how it fits or leads to certain conclusions. In the traditional Greek synthesis meant a "placing" of two or more things "with" one another as a combination, but in the discovery of existent truths one is only discovering pre-existing combinations. Both induction and deduction discover pre-existent combinations or truths. Some people dislike the idea of everything and everyone being analyzed and dissected, not that it can be done completely, but yet the fact that it can be done to a certain degree is disturbing to some people. Psychoanalysis was a great discovery and development in human thought and is something that can be applied to how we view all things, including ourselves and all other people generally and is not just useful for neurotic people and their problems. Human beings need to cultivate and improve their "inner being" and their general existence by the use of reason as well as through values and feelings and the most efficient way to do this is through the analysis of both subjective and objective knowledge. Compassion, mutual understanding and support for others are necessary components of an improved existence for all people. Even though in general deduction is used more than induction in dialectic philosophy it is induction that lays the foundation for a lot of science and the scientific method, so analysis in philosophy becomes more scientific when its deductions are established and founded on inductive truths and conclusions rather than being highly subjective and unscientific. The nature of human beings does not always seem rational, but this is only because we do not fully understand why a persons behaviour is so and so, but if we took the time to analyze this person and their behaviour with all the correct knowledge and also considering all the unknown elements involved then their behaviour would not be too difficult to understand. A person is represented more by their own behaviour than the entirety of what they claim themselves to be, so we judge them by their behaviour because we cannot judge a person on what they think, feel or say or on what they claim themselves to be, but only on what they are (which is their behaviour). Even though there are many logical methods and techniques in philosophy for discovering truths there are none that are as crucial and as useful as logical analysis itself. Logical analysis is the most active and penetrating of all the logical methods one can employ.