Discussion:  All Topics 
Topic:  February 2003: Question 3 
Post a new topic to the Research Area Discussion discussion 

Subject:  Bacon's Idols 
Author:  gayla 
Date:  Mar 28 2003 
that Bacon was right in saying that subjective thinking is inescapable. And
that he was also right in saying that we should constantly try to be objective
regardless, that it should be a constant pursuit.
How I would think about this is to assume that Bacon was right, that the human
condition is subjective, and try to find a way to interject artificiality that
might simulate or hover around objectivity. Again, a math model comes to mind.
Is there a way to model and predict subjective influences in decision making,
and to use those models to estimate corrections? Because it would seem to me
that it would be good to start with a base model that will predict objectivity
vs. subjectivity, since that is at least partially what your question stems
from, and which likely already exists, and perhaps use that base to address
different topics, one being the question that you pose.
And maybe different ranges of constants, like in the logistics equation, could
represent different viewpoints, something like a color wheel but reflecting
areas of viewpoints, so that you could close in on a viewpoint where two colors,
or in this case viewpoints, have a large intersection. If you could come up
with a representative equation, and somehow let particular users identify
(assuming that they know) where they fall in, then you might develop a base
system with individualized results.
Does this make any sense at all? I'm not going to go back and read it.
 
Post a new topic to the Research Area Discussion discussion  