The Disclaimer

[2022-02-16 Wed 19:09] - 7961

Over the recent posts, I’ve realized that the way I am naturally inclined to present my thoughts and observations is not exactly a science.
Consequently, it is subject to - objective or subjective - critique which is good as that incentivizes me to bring some rigor into the picture.
Therefore, this document intends to clarify my intentions …

The Intentions

Observation

I intend to explore whatever interests me over my life as an observer, not an expert, as a result of which, the reader may encounter a lot of pseudo-scientific vocabulary being employed (“feels”, “seems”, “most”, “generally”, “usually”, and so on) in several posts.

This is not a collection of dogmatic proclamations, but simply a curious epistemological nomad’s journal - over the coming years, I hope to be able to divorce the idea of marrying ideas, to be able to observe all there is impartially (note that I do not believe that all ideas are equal : some definitely seem to be superior and some inferior) and delay opinionated judgment until someone explicitly asks for it.

Generation

I intend to generate naturally consequent ideas that follow a particularly explored thread - usually arising from a series of questions that one should be inclined to ask when first encountering a novel stream of thought.
Intellectual correctness is definitely not on my mind when I initiate a particular stream and I believe it should follow after some empirical extension of that stream. I treat it as a tool to be summoned when verifying my footsteps taken on a stream in hindsight, not one to be employed when generating an extension.

What I don’t care about ..

Being Wrong

Again, this is going to be an epistemological journal - rigor is not the primary objective. I also don’t proof read what I write sometimes (I write in a spartan-ish setup and don’t use any checkers/recommenders) - errors might be chanced upon once every “white” moon.
The reason being that I’d prefer minimal delays and efforts to generate exceptional content instead of investing more time and effort to simply fret the insignificant, smaller details. I will stick to this as ideas tend to be dynamic and I would rather capture ten minor updates than one seemingly major update.
I will value observational completeness over correctness in all my pseudo-sciency posts.
Albeit, this is not to be taken as my lack of interest for correctness - I’m simply don’t fear being wrong anymore (it’s a difficult (but liberating) assertion, and is a more recent realization) …,
… as long as I commence with the right intentions.
Lastly, quoting Elbert Hubbard:

To avoid criticism ..

say nothing, do nothing, be nothing

Being Boring

I shouldn’t have a problem with this.., but worth mentioning.

TS,DSO

This post is “Too Short, Don’t Skip Over” it.