Justification of Assumptions

More
5 years 6 months ago #326614 by Tellahane
So I'm pulling the following out of another thread so it doesn't divert the thread further:

[quote="Kyrin Wyldstar" post=326582]Lack of knowledge does not give you the right to insert any conclusion you feel is justified and then proceed to act on that judgment by launching a personal campaign against me. [/quote]

Tellahane wrote: This part right here, this notion you put out I find the most interesting, because about 90% of the flaming and yelling here on the forums from most people in general, and specifically speaking the bold, but also you yourself Kyrin do this exact thing. Especially in the most active threads in the last couple days. Even more especially with concerns of council. This is probably one of the biggest faults I see in a great deal of people lately actually.

Kyrin Wyldstar wrote: Don't confuse an ignorance fallacy with a moral difference of opinion.


At what quantity of knowledge about any given situation is one considered able to pass judgement or a conclusion about any given scenario. For example, if someone only knows about 5% of the situation does that quantify enough to pass judgement? At what level does it quantify? At one point does one truly consider whether they actually know as much as they need to know? Where do you find that level at?

I have a unique perspective because I can see, or used to see both sides of the story in a lot of the arguments and complaints especially with council and there are good reasons why some things stay hidden, but to see some of the comments and judgements and conclusions made...it's just surprising to me.

So what is everyone's opinion on the idea, what quantity if it can be qualified as a quantity at all of information must you have about any given act or scenario or situation before you feel that it's appropriate to pass a judgement or conclusion? At what point is that judgement considered a valid judgement, or simply an assumption, or even a baseless assumption?

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 6 months ago #326615 by
Replied by on topic Justification of Assumptions
That's a difficult one, the question you bring up, but a good one, I think.
Sure, people are entitled to their opinions, but I've in the past argued that where those opinions regard matters of fact, how well they align with said facts does create a great deal of variance to the value of one's opinions.. Further complicating the matter, among the few genuinely involved and privy to the actual facts of the matter prompting this discussion, there are visibly a great deal of emotions involved, which very much influences ones perceptions of the events and the facts surrounding them... Are the people involved even capable of true objectivity, or even complete honesty, regardless of which "side" they're on?
At the end of it all, this seems to surround events that have already come to pass, and arguing over them, from a pragmatic perspective, is moot. It won't change what has happened, but, as I hopefully implied at the beginning of this post, discussion is not without merit.
Just as there are innumerable ways to interpret The Force, so too does this give a great deal for an outsider on the issue to consider. Most importantly, most relevantly, is a strong lack of information at all; I've seen a lot of allusion to events and the information surrounding them, but little else. How than is one to establish a base number for quantification, in the first place? It's almost like an extended "word problem" in basic mathematics, the first thing you have to do in order to get the information that matters is cut it down to what's relevant to the problem, and from what I've seen, and if some of my suggestions early on have any weight to them, it may not even be possible.
I decline to go any further, lest it increase my chances of being alienated from one side or the other; I smell the suggestion of conspiracy, and as many have seen outside of the internet, people who question the conspiracy become part of it. "If you're not with us, you're against us".
Am I making any sense?

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 6 months ago #326618 by Rosalyn J
Hi
I don't believe that anyone can have all the information. We must contend with mere pieces.
So the question becomes from where am I going to get my information?
Picture an avocado. A good chunk of it, Probably about 30%, is a seed. I cannot eat it. But someone could say to me, "this is part of an avocado" and be right. I'd be a fool to assume that this "part" was just like the whole.
Further, the "important" percent of information one needs is largely dependant on the action one is going to take using it.
So it's much more than quantity. it is the right type of information from the right type of people for the right reason

Pax Per Ministerium
[img



The following user(s) said Thank You: Tellahane, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 6 months ago - 5 years 6 months ago #326619 by
Replied by on topic Justification of Assumptions
When it comes to people I try to not make assumptions of them at all.

I have noticed that communication is easiest when you don´t assume anything.

However when I see somebody do something or the fruits of their doings,

I can judge the doing itself based on it´s results.

I don´t think that things are good or bad by their nature. Rather things

are good or bad depending on motives they have done or planned with,

or things can be judged good or bad depending on their effects.

Nothing itself is good nor bad and thus should not be judged by their

essence.
Last edit: 5 years 6 months ago by .

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 6 months ago #326620 by
Replied by on topic Justification of Assumptions
I let a person's actions speak for themselves. They can say one thing and do the opposite, so I believe it when I see it. I can judge as much as I want, but that doesn't make me right. What does make me right in any assertion is what is based on evidence.

Now, extrapolation is different. Extrapolation is not judgment. It is the ability to draw conclusions from incomplete data. It may not be the most accurate, but it's something with which to start. From there, any evidence for or against an assertion based on my extrapolation is considered in developing a more accurate conclusion.

Bias is yet another thing that is also not the same thing as judgment. It may sway a person'e judgment, but, again, it is not judgment.

Judging and being judgmental are also different things. It's important for us to be able to judge things in order to persist in our existence, otherwise people wouldn't know whether there is a difference between safe to eat berries and poisonous berries. Being judgmental (also referred to as criticism, sometimes) can be a rather daunting thing to deal with, being the one who is being judged in a critical manner. It typically stems from a wounded ego, or previous negative experience with a type of situation.

Basing a judgment on an assumption is foolish, to say the least.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 6 months ago #326622 by Tetrahedron
In my opinion,
Our perspectives are imperfect (meaning, can we really know anything 100%) so our attempts to judge anything are based on our and society's values or what we think is right, and that's subject to change. We can only trust ourselves and the force that we are doing right based on all knowledge and wisdom available, and strive towards the light.

Apprentice To Knight Atania
IP Team
The following user(s) said Thank You: , Tellahane, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 6 months ago #326623 by Gisteron
Setting aside whether choice is a real thing in the first place, and assuming that it is, pretty much any decision we make is a judgement, and a discrimination between the options at our avail. There is nothing wrong with passing those in principle. We don't have to make judgements, no matter how great our understanding, and at the same time we are allowed to make them, no matter how poor. What I think we'd do well, is if we proportioned our confidence in and zeal towards the judgements we end up making to the extent of our grasp of the situation.
It's not that we mustn't judge things we do not fully comprehend, but rather, after we do, we should be ready to review our conclusions, should our understanding grow in future, and change it, if we eventually find our initial verdict to be inadequate.

Better to leave questions unanswered than answers unquestioned
The following user(s) said Thank You: , Tellahane

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 6 months ago #326624 by Proteus
Let me know if I'm off the mark here, but may I simply suggest the idea of driving your communication with genuine questions to invite the person your talking with to provide the answers you need so that the least amount of assumptions will be made as possible, instead of agendas consisting of winning public games of social chess?

“For it is easy to criticize and break down the spirit of others, but to know yourself takes a lifetime.”
― Bruce Lee

House of Orion
Offices: Education Administration
TM: Alexandre Orion | Apprentice: Loudzoo (Knight)

The Book of Proteus
IP Journal | Apprentice Volume | Knighthood Journal | Personal Log
The following user(s) said Thank You: , Tellahane, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

More
5 years 6 months ago - 5 years 6 months ago #326625 by Adder
Replied by Adder on topic Justification of Assumptions

Tellahane wrote: So what is everyone's opinion on the idea, what quantity if it can be qualified as a quantity at all of information must you have about any given act or scenario or situation before you feel that it's appropriate to pass a judgement or conclusion? At what point is that judgement considered a valid judgement, or simply an assumption, or even a baseless assumption?


I'm more interested in measuring genuine then accuracy, most of the time. So my approach would be;

1. If someone has little knowledge but strong conviction, then their conviction is the dominant influence on the expression - the question then is why. It cannot be the extent of knowledge, so it must be something else.

2. If someone has strong knowledge and strong conviction, then their conviction can easily be the result of the knowledge, and further it shows effort or experience in acquiring strong knowledge which also points to a measure of genuine intent.

For assuming (sorry, I do it all the time!!) that there can be no certainty, then everything is a measure of probability - and from that we might automatically assert placeholder concepts to define iterations of probability as belief, which together form a canvas of labels... in and out of various degrees of focus. The question then seems to be less about the accuracy of those concepts and more about the conviction attributed to them.

If the disconnect between those two things is overt (like in point 1.), then it probably belies some underlying agenda (deliberate) or disorder (cannot help it) IMO.... see what I'm doing here is not being too judgmental on myself for intrinsically having to assume things that are beyond my capacity to know, for my agenda is curiosity :D

Because if accuracy and conviction are divorced enough, from my assumptions alone, AND its not an agenda or disorder, then I am really over-stating the extent of my focus if I hold it as strong conviction!!!

So other then that..... this might also happen when ignorant to the extent that my accuracy is actually wrong. Basically not knowing how daft I might be sounding - though I'd have to say it would be quite easy to spot just because things would not make sense - and if a person's genuine about being accurate and stuff doesn't add up then it likely would erode conviction to be replaced by curiosity. Otherwise, when one has conviction about any opinion regardless of accuracy then they are going to get into trouble sooner or later, which tends to make me consider it a disorder, notably a delusion.

Knight ~ introverted extropian, mechatronic neurothealogizing, technogaian buddhist. Likes integration, visualization, elucidation and transformation.
Jou ~ Deg ~ Vlo ~ Sem ~ Mod ~ Med ~ Dis
TM: Grand Master Mark Anjuu
Last edit: 5 years 6 months ago by Adder.
The following user(s) said Thank You: , Tellahane, Kobos

Please Log in to join the conversation.

  • Visitor
  • Visitor
    Public
5 years 6 months ago #326626 by
Replied by on topic Justification of Assumptions

Proteus wrote: Let me know if I'm off the mark here, but may I simply suggest the idea of driving your communication with genuine questions to invite the person your talking with to provide the answers you need so that the least amount of assumptions will be made as possible, instead of agendas consisting of winning public games of social chess?


I try not to play social chess because I’m not that good at it lol. I simply feel the need to deconstruct assumptions to analyze and differentiate between what I know and what I don’t.

Please Log in to join the conversation.

Moderators: ZerokevlarVerheilenChaotishRabeRiniTavi