3 ms·
"[...] let a person confess within reason" That evidently is where everything gets messy. We don't have a way (yet) to determine if it is "within reason". Tra
by achrono 4y ago
"[...] let a person confess within reason"
That evidently is where everything gets messy. We don't have a way (yet) to determine if it is "within reason".
Transcending this tendency of deflection requires transcending the notion of the self -- the deflection is after all for the sake of the self and for those experts at deflection it may have been an especially crucial ingredient for their success.
The good news is that we already do transcend the self, or at least seek to do so, in many ways. But I think we (meaning modern Western society and allies) aren't able to digest the full implications of this -- something the Buddhists understood very well, which is that you can only get there with total renunciation and not a wishful combination of self-transcendence with tons of material prosperity sustained over long periods of time.
- mistermann 4y agoIt seems to me that most people can transcend the self when discussing abstract ideas (say, the topic of conversation is cognitive bias), but during certain object level conversations (say, political matters) the ability seems to essentially vanish. People can realize they are subject to bias when considering that abstract idea directly, but not when they are contemplating object level matters. I think the phenomenon is fairly decently explained by Mike Tyson: "Everyone has a plan until they get punched in the face".