I had a similar thought while reading this post, but I’m not sure invoking causality is necessary (having a direction still seems necessary). Just in terms of propositional logic, I would explain this post as follows:
1. Initially, one has the implication X⟹Y stored in one’s mind.
2. Someone asserts X.
3. Now one’s mind (perhaps subconsciously) does a modus ponens, and obtains Y.
4. However, Y is an undesirable belief, so one wants to deny it.
5. Instead of rejecting the implication X⟹Y, one adamantly denies X.
The “buckets error” is the implication X⟹Y, and “flinching away” is the denial of X. Flinching away is about protecting one’s epistemology because denying X is still better than accepting Y. Of course, it would be best to reject the implication X⟹Y, but since one can’t do this (by assumption, one makes the buckets error), it is preferable to “flinch away” from X.
ETA (2019-02-01): It occurred to me that this is basically the same thing as “one man’s modus ponens is another man’s modus tollens” (see e.g. this post) but with some extra emotional connotations.
I had a similar thought while reading this post, but I’m not sure invoking causality is necessary (having a direction still seems necessary). Just in terms of propositional logic, I would explain this post as follows:
1. Initially, one has the implication X⟹Y stored in one’s mind.
2. Someone asserts X.
3. Now one’s mind (perhaps subconsciously) does a modus ponens, and obtains Y.
4. However, Y is an undesirable belief, so one wants to deny it.
5. Instead of rejecting the implication X⟹Y, one adamantly denies X.
The “buckets error” is the implication X⟹Y, and “flinching away” is the denial of X. Flinching away is about protecting one’s epistemology because denying X is still better than accepting Y. Of course, it would be best to reject the implication X⟹Y, but since one can’t do this (by assumption, one makes the buckets error), it is preferable to “flinch away” from X.
ETA (2019-02-01): It occurred to me that this is basically the same thing as “one man’s modus ponens is another man’s modus tollens” (see e.g. this post) but with some extra emotional connotations.