prof wrote: ↑
Wed Feb 13, 2019 3:29 am
Age wrote: ↑
Sun Feb 10, 2019 5:57 am
However, if any computer or any person is seen as an 'authority', then what you are proposing here on this page will just collapse.
What was actually written in the book is this:
With the aid of social media this computer’s noncontroversial output will be widely publicized by all sorts of media. If done right, these reported findings will come to feel rather authoritative. They may thus gain wide respect, at least by educated people. These findings could serve as guidelines for educators, policy-makers, and parents.
If "findings" are NOT agreed upon and NOT accepted by EVERY one, which is what is implied by saying, "at least by 'educated people', then the "findings/guidelines" will NOT want to be followed and adhered to by EVERY one.
prof wrote: ↑
Wed Feb 13, 2019 3:29 am
In suggesting that the output of the survey made by a super-computer "might come to feel rather authoritative," I did not mean, even for a moment, that it would trample on people, boss them around, or dominate over them
I KNEW you did not mean it that way. But any 'feeling of authoritative' that comes from outside of one's own self does NOT jell well with that one.
I can fully understand, now that you have highlighted this for me here, that 'whatever', (the output of a computer, the findings, or whatever else,) may feel
authoritative; because that authoritative feeling
does arise when one KNOWS, for sure, some thing by them self, which would be in agreement with absolute EVERY one. This is the 'KNOWING' that I refer to, and which is the GUIDE that absolutely EVERY one will want to follow and want to adhere to voluntarily anyway.
If any "findings/guidelines" come from an outside source, other than from one's own self, and it is publicized but it does NOT make sense to a person, then it WILL BE 'controversial output'. The only 'noncontroversial output', which would feel
authoritative is that what is agreed with and accepted by ALL. If it makes sense and is agreed with by ALL, then it will be respected, but if it has only got "wide" respect by some, even if it is at least by so called "educated people", then it will be CONTROVERSIAL. For any thing to be Truly 'noncontroversial' then it obviously would have the widest of respect, by EVERY one, and NOT just some. "Educated" or not.
What I would have been better writing, which would have been more correct is; If any computer, any person, or any thing, is seen as an 'authority', other than one's own self, then what you are proposing here on this page will just collapse.
In order for 'findings' to be able to Truly feel rather authoritative
, then those 'findings', literally, have to be 'found' from within one's own self. Only when answers are 'found' by and from one's own self, which make absolute sense with EVERY thing else, are KNOWN 100% for sure to be True, Right, and Correct, then that is when that True authoritative feeling
will be felt. It is NOT an authoritative feeling of control over "others" but only a sense of control over one's own self.
If there is any sense of an outside source feeling authoritative, (outside of one's own self), then what you are proposing will NOT work.
Any authoritative feeling other than what comes naturally from one's own self will only lead to resentment, revenge, revolt, rebelling, and eventually to a revolution. A reason why rules and law have never successfully worked is because they are made up by some, enforced by some others, in an attempt to over power and control some more. Rules and law and only work because of fear and judgement.
Some might now be thinking that if there was NOT, so called, 'law and "order" ', then there would be anarchy, mayhem, and/or chaos, but if those people are ONLY doing what is, so called "right" because of rules, then what would they say if asked, "Why is that?"
If those people who BELIEVE that there HAS TO be 'rules', but do NOT know WHY they, themselves, would go around doing wrong, hurting and harming others if there were no rules, then they still have some more to learn, BEFORE they start deciding 'what is right and what is wrong in Life' and choosing what is ethically best or not.
What is accepted and agreed upon by SOME is NOT the best for ALL. Only 'THAT' what is in agreement and accepted by ALL is what is best for ALL.
Only 'THAT' what is in agreement and accepted by ALL, as being right and wrong in LIfe, is what is Truly wanted anyway, and is what is wanted to be naturally followed and adhered to also. By just doing what one naturally wants to do, without any fear at all of blame, judgement, and punishment, then they will want to keep doing what they are doing voluntarily, and thus very happily also.