My prize is in seeing.
You are never wrong. No one is ever wrong. What do you think of this?
I can buy that.
I know some people who believe that. I think I am never wrong but everyone else is.
The process for assessing rightness or wrongness of a point of view is non existent. The disciplines of philosophy exist in their diverse array of forms because there is no solid way to judge rightness of any point of view. Religion has had as much influence as it has not because of concrete objective wisdom, but because of traditional and nationalist ways of thinking. What do you think of this?
I agree, confirmation bias.
It does explain a lot.
Though you don’t always have to be the one fighting for your assertion. Other people can do the same experiment on their own and unfortunately often come to a divergent conclusion.
Science is just philosophy with trial by combat. Sciences consistency doesn’t stem from the merit of scientific method alone. Is that unfair to say?
No, the scientists have to agree on a fact.
There are definitely cliques of scientists. And those aren’t closed loops. They have patrons, and outside philosophy influences much of their research, and assessment speaks more to their personal sense of aesthetics than objective observation.
Ah yes, there are “scientists” paid by oil companies to refute climate change, though often you will see these people have a degree in political science, and not physics or chemistry. Some would argue that discipline isn’t even a science, that none of the social sciences are science at all.
Yes, our beliefs cause us to highlight specific things and omit others.
So do you ever feel you need advice? If so when?
When making a big purchase like a first home.
I often use Google to look for advice.
When I’m in unfamiliar territory.
So you feel you need advice in the gaps so to speak. Those breaks in personal knowledge and experience where you have a vested interest in the outcome but not the background or inclination to understand the issue at hand.
Yes, but I likely need it more when I think I’m on solid ground. How would you know your personal view of your life and the world you know is solid? Reliably true?
Well, I’m not questioning it beyond that I don’t. Why is it that we don’t question the apparent elements of our experience?
I may be different than other people, but I often am testing my ideas. Testing behaviours, methodology, inherently place constraints on what will be discovered. You can discover as much about a scientists personality from their own habits and methodology as you can learn about an artist from their own expressive efforts.
How you formulate a question automatically biases the discovered answer.
So where are the genuine gaps in our experience? Where does our knowledge actually fall short?
Things outside our observation?
In the things we haven’t experienced, but only heard about.
Second stage. You are never right, and have never been right. What you are trying to do when you are trying to be right is an entirely imaginary effort, all in your head. Learning is a process of story progression and we never learn to write for ourselves. What do you think of this assertion?
So if it isn’t right or wrong what is it? It is either continuous or discontinuous.
All human beings, actually all living beings, seek first and above all else a sense of continuity. This is why tradition arose, why religion arose, why the idea to found a nation occurred to anyone. Is there any reason beyond this that I am unaware of?
So when you ask, is this the right thing or the wrong thing, you’re really looking for what would help the story continue? Ultimately, yes, but there are multiple threads to consider in all situations. The three fates each have their own job to do.
I guess then we get violent when the continuity is threatened.
It’s true, we have a god so the story makes sense.
Do you need advice?
You need co-authors, like parents, elders.
Your thoughts are welcome. Be well friends.