Communication of Complexity LO4559

GaltJohn22@aol.com
Tue, 2 Jan 1996 23:01:02 -0500

Replying to LO4530 --

In a message dated 96-01-02 21:14:34 EST, you write:

>As often said by members of this LO community, it is the assumptions we
>make that damage us. I found it helpful to break the assumptions into two
>types, which I distinguish as follows:

John:

I have found it HIGHLY useful to break all things into three categories:

That which is fact
That which is judgement
That which is opinion

I've made a minor life study of sorting through random beliefs in my head
as they become unearthed for one reason or another. "Which is that F, J
or O?" If, as much does, it falls into J I then attempt an inference chain
that will prove the fact-base and the logic operators. If this works then
I call it F.

The O is, probably the most problematic. But I believe that just KNOWING
it's O rather than the arrogant assumption that "OUR" Opinion is Fact is a
huge improvement over this more common paradigm.

Joining to the "Choice -vs- Illusion"thread - I choose my paradigm in this
fashion.

For what it's worth it has produced startling results for me and has truly
changed my life. Indeed, I am writing a book on the subject.

--
Hal Popplewell
GaltJohn22@aol.com