Nostr Web Client

We definitely can, it's just going to take a consistent flow of deprogramming content on a mass scale.

This is the final boss of #LittleSeason deception; it quite literally began (HEAVILY) before we could even form words or coherent thoughts.

But the fact that it's becoming a legitimate debate is a great step in the right direction.

...the next step is for all the podcasters who are calling me retarded to actually invite me on their show, so we can have a discussion about it, and see who actually has the stronger points 😉 (please tag them below, I've been trying for months and am still getting crickets 🦗)

nostr:nevent1qvzqqqqqqypzprze8nrqsss9y28e6huzvfy4jecshwlwvgmd2n3vwjegymgqunyrqqsrsf59eh043x7vmts8gddcthj07xnpe2k4jq0zudcn9qmwuv78gaskgja49

RedTailHawk 1mo ago

Any given person has a set of assumptions, a set of knowns, a set of known unknowns(questions), and a set of unknown unknowns.

If someone, Alice, shares her perspective with you, and Alice’s perspective, in comparison to your perspective, reduces your number of assumptions, converts some of your known unknowns (questions) to knowns(answers), and converts some of your unknown unknowns into known unknowns (questions), Occam’s razor suggests that Alice’s perspective is, at the very least, less distorted than your legacy perspective and is therefore a worthy candidate perspective for you to consider for adoption.

If someone offered a perspective that reduced your number of assumptions, converted some of your known unknowns into knowns, and converted some of your unknown unknowns into known unknowns, and part of that other perspective included a spheroidal earth, what would you do?

To help imagine what this perspective would look like, it would essentially be able to explain YOLO vs reincarnation, global flood myths, ancient lost civilizations, and it would be able to decode religions and bridge the core that unites them all with science. If a perspective like that was presented to you and, as a necessary component of that perspective, the earth was a spheroid, but basically every other major question you could possibly imagine is satisfactorily answered by this perspective, would you abandon the flat earth theory and adopt that other perspective?

Reply to this note

Please Login to reply.

Discussion

₿en Wehrman 1mo ago

I have never been more confused about a question in my life 😂

Can you summarize it in one sentence and pretend I'm retarded (I am)

RedTailHawk 1mo ago

If you "kept score" in multiple categories as some hypothetical super-perspective was unraveled for you, and you noticed at the end that the hypothetical super-perspective had a dominant score versus your legacy perspective, would you abandon your legacy perspective and adopt the hypothetical super-perspective even if said super-perspective necessarily included a spheroidal Earth?

₿en Wehrman 1mo ago

I guess it depends? If the other topics were relevant enough to outweight the flat earth proof then sure.

But the ones you listed above (floods, ancient civilizations, reincarnation) are irrelevant to the Earth's shape. If anything they support FE as all ancient civilizations believed in that model of the universe

RedTailHawk 1mo ago

I like the top half of your response.

As for the bottom half, you can't just claim that those subjects are irrelevant to the Earth's shape if you haven't actually consumed the hypothetical super-perspective that necessarily contains a spheroidal Earth. Definitionally, because this theory is purely hypothetical, you can't say that it does not possess links between those subjects and the shape of the Earth. Those links are unknown unknowns to you.

To your point, reincarnation/YOLO does not directly have anything to do with the shape of the Earth, however, a hypothetical super-perspective that ties everything together in ways that are satisfactory to basically every tradition including science would have such a dominant score on the scoreboard that Occam's razor has to enter the discussion. The point in invoking reincarnation/YOLO and the other topics was to point out that there are huge, very contentious topics besides Earth geometry and if a perspective had answers for all of those things it would necessitate having some model of Earth's shape. Obviously if it included a flat earth model, you'd be all over it. That's easy to consider. I'm asking about the hard version.

Next question, if such a hypothetical super-perspective was claimed to exist, would you "empty your cup", to borrow from the Zen koan, and temporarily suspend all beliefs in order to steelman the hypothetical super-perspective?

What I would expect to happen with a typical person would be as follows:

Let's say that Alice needs about 14 hours straight to roll out her hypothetical super-perspective. While that may seem like a long time, that's not all that bad for a super-perspective. People sign up for courses that take more time for less important things than a unified super-perspective.

Bob gets antsy after about 2 minutes of listing to Alice talk and Bob wants to object already even though there is still 13 hours and 58 minutes left of stuff for Alice to roll out. In other words, Bob is most likely to impatiently disallow Alice from cooking, by interrupting Alice's cooking process which takes a while given the magnitude of what is "in scope".

Would you be able to let Alice cook and hear her out, uninterrupted?