|
Post by Smithee on Jan 24, 2014 21:33:11 GMT 10
I expect this to be deleted from A406: a406.proboards.com/post/21899/thread
Try entering into the scene and experiencing it directly. As anyone correctly predicting events in a fictional plot knows the significance of two or more people imagining a similar narrative (e.g., the butler did it) says more about archetypes and other memes prevalent in their milieu or in society generally than it does about the subject of that narrative. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Narrative_psychology
"The belief that one can find out something about real things by speculation alone is one of the most long-lived delusions in human thought. It is the spirit of anti-science which is always trying to lead men away from the study of reality to the spinning of fanciful theories out of their own minds."
"We can distinguish as a special kind of crooked thinking the attempt to get knowledge of fact by speculative methods. This attempt is being made in any argument which tries to deduce what 'is' from what the speaker feels 'ought to be' or 'must be', or whenever a person in discussion tries to draw conclusions about facts from the use of words."
|
|
|
Post by Tamrin on Jan 25, 2014 8:25:32 GMT 10
So far the post is still there. However the qualification of "alone" with respect to "speculation" seems to have been overlooked, with the respondents seeming to read your post as if you are saying speculation has NO place in rational discourse. Previous advice I gave there was to: Speculate by all means: Then corroborate or debunk The other alternative is to set an unsupported speculation to one side, if unfalsified. Then, if it seems relevant, to cautiously qualify it in rational discourse with full, open and honest reservations.
|
|