Pieces like this make me want to find the original books and read them, I wonder how many more insights I could find there. C.S. Lewis seems to resonate particu

Pieces like this make me want to find the original books and read them, I wonder how many more insights I could find there. C.S. Lewis seems to resonate particularly well with me and with how I reason (same holds for Chesterton). I think Lewis is right in blaming Bulverism. So I asked myself: can I identify a way in which Bulverism originates? How can I avoid it and how can I suggest other people to avoid it? Sorry for the excursus, but I hope someone will find it useful :D It's very interesting, to me at least, to notice that getting "completely" rid of bulverism seems very difficult - perhaps impossible? Perhaps because it's part of how humans start the process of knowledge. Let me explain... Reasoning can go, a priori, in several different directions. Which one to pick? From a practical point of view, you pick the one that stimulates you the most: and this way, someone becomes a mathematician, someone else an engineer, someone else a poet, a doctor, and so on. This movement has both some bulverism and some anti-bulverism: you hear someone speak, and a-priori, you feel like he's right (is there a name for this fallacy too?). And I think that starting the process of knowledge with some pre-conception is unavoidable and also what makes diversity possible. So when does a safe practice become a threat? I think it's when we lose faith in the positiveness of reality, that is: in the possibility of knowing what's true and that this knowledge is what really makes us more humans. Bulverism is saying that I value more what I think than what's true, or that I value more to blame you than to affirm the truth. It's interesting to see in how many way reasoning can go wrong once you exclude that reasoning has its natural end in the knowledge of what's true.