JBP Study group – tips on the process they naturally follow to formulate an argument

JPB study group – Crene Sutherland – … “Does anyone have any tips on the process they naturally follow to formulate an argument.”…

[ 13/4/20 ]

Lots of good beginnings in other sets of advice.

It is complex and time consuming.

Read, yes – as many different domains as possible.

And learn the Buddhist notion of beginners mind, like the four cups. To learn something new the mind must be like the empty cup, clean, upright, ready to receive what is coming without distortion or dilution. (The other 3 cups are dirty {changes what is received}, has a hole {does not retain what is received}, and upside down {does not receive what is sent}).

Once you have received something, then take the time to contemplate and integrate it.

What are the themes and levels within what you have read (or heard or learned or otherwise encountered); how deep do abstraction and recursion go?

After you are confident that you have adequately explored it in itself, then see how does it integrate and correlate to other datasets and interpretive schema that you explored?

Then, if appropriate, reassess the reliability and contextual appropriateness of the sets of schema you now have available to the contexts you are likely to encounter.

And always be aware that all concepts are traps that tend to make us classify things that are close but subtly yet significantly different.

A big part of that is retraining the subconscious to retain and notice the new sets of distinctions that you deem appropriate for sets of contexts.

As part of that process, you will from time to time find new levels of abstraction and awareness emerge. The more often that process occurs the more difficulty you will have communicating anything you find at those higher levels of abstraction, but the better you will be able to relate many things at lower levels.

And as with everything in life, practice bring improvements.

Biology and culture offer the greatest examples of embodied complexity available for study.

Mathematics and logic give us the best tools for building models of complexity (and always be aware that the best map is not the territory, it is only a guide). Pure math, computational theory, complexity theory, strategy theory, are examples of deeply dimensional geometries in a sense.

Computers are amazing tools for testing conjectures in models, and for keeping track of details we might otherwise forget.

Become as familiar as possible with all of these domains.

We have a very strong set of tendencies to build straw men of anything we are unfamiliar with; make the effort to “steel man” anything you suspect may be novel or important in any possible dimension.

Become aware that there are infinite possible interpretive schema, most of which are some reasonable approximation to optimal for survival in some set of contexts. Respect and acceptance are very valuable tools, as is cooperation.

About Ted Howard NZ

Seems like I might be a cancer survivor. Thinking about the systemic incentives within the world we find ourselves in, and how we might adjust them to provide an environment that supports everyone (no exceptions) - see www.tedhowardnz.com/money
This entry was posted in Ideas, Philosophy, understanding and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Comment and critique welcome

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s