Thanks for your continuation of our discussion, @yvesoler.
My uncertain (!) ideas about our discussion follow:
I don't see a declaration of failure in your message, and so I don't know where you think you (we?) have failed.
You did declare that we created a "strong foundation"; what more might we have done to meet your standards for success? Is success "all or none"? (more on this further on). It's not always a nominal black/white assessment, is it?
http://lucidphilosophy.com/black-and-white-fallacy/
It's very interesting to me that you want more. So do I, but achieving deep insights takes more than agreeing on a few precepts. Please share specifically what's important to you that you want to learn so that we can get to it...I don't know what you want to figure out. To support you in doing that I'd need to know what that is.
I have the same request to everyone who reads this. I can't do my job unless people work with me on learning what they want to know.
My job isn't just writing my stuff. That's a small part of it. More effective educational processes arise from one on one conversations with people who are committed to learning.
I've found that it's a good idea to focus on one issue at a time and deal with it until we're satisfied. I'm used to doing things the harder way, but I don't recommend it.
I agree that we should shorten each post, and I suggest that each one should deal with a single issue. We could then use the comments string to deal with each subject until we both (or all of us, if anyone will join) decide that our perspectives are very well justified.
Did you read my ebook? I dropped it at https://discord.gg/3UJyZPc. This isn't my first experience with this sort of thing...
“we may need to limit the number of concepts"
Naturally. I think that it might be best to work at what we think is most important to each of us. It’s both exhausting and impossible for anyone to handle everything imo!
“I will do my best to answer everything”
Well, ok, I understand your desire to be thorough, which I share. I do believe that progress will be greatest if we’ll stick to exposing the roots of our understandings of the things that we most want to learn (or share) about. If you don't care about something then I don't see much use for us in dealing with it. I'd suggest that you stick with things that you think are most important for us to learn about. I won't mind if you don't handle my concerns unless it seems to me that you're dropping a discussion of something that's very important to you or others.
Obviously, my greatest interest is not always about learning the worst things that people think about me (although that is sometimes very important for me to know), or defending myself against unjust(?) criticisms. Those processes can get in the way of my other purposes. I’d be pleased for folks to discuss the content of my work rather than my motives and my personality, but you see what’s happened so far…
“I am still not sure I am doing it right”
Oh, my! This is both a psychological issue and a philosophical one.
Philosophy first:
Which right way?????
Who decides that? Who’s capable of figuring out for certain what’s right?
Is it even possible that we could ever know for sure the one way that’s definitely more right than every other way?
I don’t think so; do you? My first substantial post at steemit revealed my background of understanding. One person is discussing that content with me.
Dropping our least coherent preconceptions about truth and facticity allows us to substitute more coherent approaches to thinking, learning and argumentation.
Instead of nominal judgments (right or wrong, true or false) I’ve learned that it’s much more coherent to use scalar assessments of morality, coherency or effectiveness, or any complex process. So my opinion is expressed as follows: That way to behave is somewhat better for us than speaking in hyperbole.
And I assess perspectives as follows : A set of ideas is more or less coherent; more coherent than some, and less coherent than others.
Black and white assessments of complex phenomena are very incoherent in my view and that of some others. (Of course I'm not promoting my own idiosyncratic ideas, here; I learned my best stuff from much wiser people than I.)
Does that make much sense to you?
The psychology of assessment:
Some of us have articulated some of our standards, and others improvise them.
Some people vociferously eschew standards altogether, claiming that they don’t care about evaluating themselves or what anybody else thinks. I sympathize with those people; it's practically impossible to know the truth about those things anyway, and it’s a chore for true believers to learn to think in terms of levels of coherency and degrees of morality.
I use standards because I believe that assessments of what we do and how we do things are important to me, if they’re based on reliable evidence and reasonable consideration.
Then there’s the question of how we deal with our assessments and those which have been delivered by others. If they’re black and white, and we believe that they’re true, then we’re stuck with them unless we find that our observation of what we assessed was mistaken. To me the mistake is believing that black and white assessments of people or behavior could be cogent in the first place.
As for more nuanced criticisms, they can be useful if they’re shared responsibly (as in: my opinion, not The Truth). That’s what critical thinking and progressive dialogues are for.
Me: ”I've been studying this phenomenon since I was ten years old”
@yvesoler: “what do you understand about this phenomenon?”
More than I can say, I think. Thanks for asking! I’ll create a new entry on that. As you suggested we could limit each entry to one issue to lessen the confusion and make things easier on ourselves.
“Could it be that their not interested appearance is actually a protective shield? To really learn, in my not-so educated experience, you have to open yourself to doubt and the possibility that you really don’t know what you think you know. In order to do this, I have to trust that the other person is willing to walk that path with me. If I think the person is going to use my doubt and vulnerability against me instead of open to the same level so we can really discuss the topic without preconceived notions, then my interest dwindles.”
Could it be that their attitude is not a protective shield? I believe that it is; that's one of those "of course" things which I believe most thoughtful people would agree on.
Does it make sense to say that many people avoid trusting people who think differently than they do?
Xenophobia is the fear or dislike of people who are different from oneself…
I’m a stranger here with an unusual act and unusual discourses.
I think that some folks are confident enough in their histories of dealing with others that their xenophobia is less severe than less confident folks; does that make much sense to you?
“With my mother, the discussion is always open, since neither of us thinks we have a monopoly on truth. All we have our thoughts on a given subject. Regardless of whether the other person’s thoughts support or negate one’s own beliefs, I find that comparing and contrasting one to the other only makes your own beliefs more complete.”
That’s great for you, Tigrilla. Those are the kinds of discussion that I prefer to participate in. I have no interest in buying into people’s certainty or in insisting that I know Truths. That to me is an anti-educational attitude.
I believe that I understand some stuff more coherently than many others do; I can’t believe that that isn’t a coherent opinion. And I’m aware that my confidence appears to others as conceit or arrogance. I only excuse myself because I’m aware that nobody’s perfect, and because I’m always working on my style to lessen the effects of my conceit! Others may not excuse me at all.
"In the absence of readable body language, I find these types of phrases to be quite useful. You don’t have to use them every time, but something to that effect could help establish that window of doubt that gives another the security needed to expose vulnerability. Did that make any sense?”
Very much so imo. I'm working on that. I avoid complete certainty like the plague, but (in my experience) most people think in terms of truths, so they don't realize, understand or believe that that's even possible, and they don't attribute that sort of self-doubt to anybody.
“So now that we have established a strong foundation, where do we go from here?*
Well, Tigrilla, I'm glad that you feel that we've progressed in creating our foundations.
I'm not clear that we've settled very much. I do agree that we should shorten each post, and I suggest that each one should deal with a single issue, We could then use the comments string to deal with each one until we both (or all of us, if anyone will join) are clear that our perspectives are well justified.
I believe that that is possible.
I'm not dictating, directing or steering anything; I'm simply willing (actively) to share my experience to support folks in learning about how humanity operates according to the sages of the ages.
I'll keep writing and posting, because some people have been interested already, and others might become so.
What I desire from people is for folks to understand me. That's primary: I believe that everybody wants to be understood. Beyond that I want people to work with me on developing or modifying their own standards for understanding coherency, morality, psychology and philosophy, because I believe that ignoring those subjects limits how coherent and wise we can get.
I recommended that activity in my first post to #education, because those processes seem important to me.
My actions here are designed to support the learners who want to talk with me, to ask questions about what's important from their perspectives, and to critically examine their own beliefs in order to create for themselves broader and more coherent sets of beliefs, opinions and theories (that is, knowledge).
Are there any other actions that people recommend I might take to fulfill that purpose on an ongoing basis?
Is there anything that I ought to do other than share my perspectives and wait for people to demonstrate interest? I haven't thought so, but I'm open to suggestions.