- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Consequentially, a record may be either an objectively sourced material or a subjectively sourced material. Are all materials rendered equally valid within your system? Is validity even a consideration, or is mere influence in value and standard formation adequate basis for inclusion?
The criteria for what is to be included/excluded is determined by the individual user. Not me
Why does that follow?
Because it simply takes more conscious effort. Also because It slows the process down.
In other words, value represents motive and standard suggests the cognitive-behavioral norm (personal or collective) arrived at via that motivational value?
I think you understand the relationship between what we value and what we do.
I would suggest that perhaps values are not hierarchical, so much as situational and non-static.
I will grant that there is a great deal of shifting values as situations change, however....I don't believe anyone on earth is without a set of values that trump many of the other values they hold.
Do you think that that is due to a lack of tools (e.g. Free Bible Press), or on account of general human disposition?
It strikes me that most people are not only non-disposed towards higher ordered critical thought, but may even be incapable of it.
What someone is incapable of today they may be capable of tomorrow. I know something about how critical thinking is cultivated.
are you trying to cause more people to think critically for themselves rather than following external authorities than would otherwise do so... or are you trying to provide a platform for those already disposed to do so but perhaps lacking the best tools for it?
I hope to do both. I also hope to create a tool that helps people network more closely with those who share values with them.
I find that ideal, though for the above reason unrealistic. Internally derived values and standards take time, intention, and intellect that not all persons might possess.
I think I can create a product that can "meet people where they are" so to speak. And challenge them without being threatening. Also, from experience I can tell you the process works well with short and long breaks between intermittent sessions.
The question might also be asked as to whether our ideal is not premature if at all relevant to the human evolutionary trajectory. If we have evolved largely as group-think species rather than as a collective of largely independent thinkers, how would that impact our social organization if it were to change?
We might not end up as Borgish :)
Can we even change that way at all? I suppose this is what I was getting at regarding your thoughts on the balance between independent perspective formulation and reliant perspective formulation.
Can we start out doing not much more than parroting those we respect and actually end up thinking for ourselves? Why yes we can sir thank you very much :)
Character is defined by our habits then?
Certainly in large part
What constitutes a habit?
Something we do over and over, either for well thought out reasons or not.
And how would one identify what is a positive/negative habit?
Conducive to our continued health = positive
Detrimental to our continued health = negative
How would this be any different from other personal online journaling platforms then?
It's not only a "journaling" tool, but it's a true personal media management system. It is designed to assert digital media rights as religious rights. Also it's designed to be used independently without connecting to any organization.
What I was getting at is whether this is more like Google Drive (collection of tools) or an interactive platform (CD), and if it is too hybrid to categorize mostly as one or the other then which attributes you would be integrating and how?
1. The Binder
2. The Site
3. The Software
Users can begin creating their collection through either 1, 2 or 3 they can use the social networking platform of their choice, or they can do it in complete privacy.
I suspect I am not entirely grasping your proposal
To be expected. I haven't explained it very thoroughly. I am looking to do most of the explaining conversationally as opposed to in essay format. Thanks for helping.
I would like to clarify to ensure I understand your proposal before I move to interrogate it. Words or phrases in italics indicate items for which I would find a definition helpful. Acceptable?
Yes. Thank you.
You view it as inherent to the human condition that in the process of consciously formulating perspective and opinion we accrue an influential corpus of records.
Yes. Records = lasting impressions made on external media, and/or within the mind (as memories)
You consider it equally inherent that this process is one of value assertion. (I am unclear if you think the formulation process is always conscious; please clarify.)
Yes, but I do feel that most people, most of the time, do it rather subconsciously. I think to make a record external to oneself serves to guarantee the process will be undertaken in a more conscientious manner.
You consider values to be hierarchical, arranged according to the standards (I am unclear how you distinguish a value from a standard) we derive from our formulation process.
Values are hierarchal in that some take precedence over others. It's easy to conflate values and standards confusingly. A value is what motivates a conscious action. A standard is a current convention.
You claim that all trust is derived from a trust in the self, by which I infer you mean that were we incapable of trusting our formulated perspective we would be incapable of engaging with anything else because that perspective is effectively our interface for engaging with the world we live in.
I think you understood me. I almost couldn't remember why I thought that was even relevant to this discussion. I was thinking about how the current trend is to accept a pre-compiled bible from some trusted authority, rather than feeling fit to compile one for oneself.
You are of the opinion that in order for our personal character development to be good we must strike a balance between independent perspective formulation (which risks confirmation bias) and reliant perspective formulation (which risks uncritical imitation).
For more reasons than these, I think that self-compiled bibles should become the new norm. By "personal character development" I am talking most simply about habit formation.
You seek to introduce the Free Press Bible Process (I still do not understand why you call it this; personally I find that reference to a specific religious text a bit disorienting with respect to your more generalized thesis) as a set of tools and procedures for striking that balance.
It's supposed to be controversial. Offer an alternative to the current, pre-compiled bible paradigm
You perceive that most of us lack focus and discipline, and ostensibly mean to indicate that Free Press Bible is a tool for overcoming those attributes
It's a form of personal journaling, and as such, yes.
You observe that one might be pulled into the process through inadvertent introspection prompted during an evaluation of others' statements. This seems to indicate that Free Press Bible is some sort of interactional platform where users would present their corpus of records and consequent perspectives for open critique by others.
I would like the tool to be of such design that it can be used as publicly or as privately as a user should choose. They should not be tied to a central organization of any kind in order to use the tool(s)
I don't think privacy needs to be sacrificed in order to benefit from the process, though I do believe that engaging with others in conversations is the best way to improve a collection
Each of us maintains a collection of records that are important to us for various reasons. We have been doing this for a long time. We are by nature record keepers. Like every action, to consciously create a record is to assert a value. It is to say "This merits some attention".
The values that we abide by are more or less flexible, depending on their position relative to the value hierarchy (think ruling logic or theology) being applied. All of us operate according to standards that (with much help) we've worked out for ourselves. This is universal. All trust is rooted in self trust.
The Free Press Bible Process, is the use of (still under development) tools to aid with the evaluative activity essential to good personal character development. Though if done in complete privacy, a serious risk of unchecked confirmation bias does exist, I am convinced that a normal and healthy transition from utterly relying on others to think for us (imitating those we model ourselves after), to thinking more and more autonomously, should be acknowledged.
"Wisdom comes when you can admire without worshiping and criticize without condemning" ~atypican
A great many of us aren't as focused as steadily on what we would prefer to be focused on, if we were more disciplined. Free Press Bible is quite simply about getting priorities in order. But the process can be started for reasons entirely less admirable, and still end up working toward that end, due to a form of introspection that goes on (often inadvertently) while evaluating other people's statements.
“Do not believe in anything simply because you have heard it. Do not believe in anything simply because it is spoken and rumored by many. Do not believe in anything simply because it is found written in your religious books. Do not believe in anything merely on the authority of your teachers and elders. Do not believe in traditions because they have been handed down for many generations. But after observation and analysis, when you find that anything agrees with reason and is conducive to the good and benefit of one and all, then accept it and live up to it.” ~ Buddha