Just to get this stuff documented and out on the table I will continue with general concepts.
This brings us to, "Opinion Bias." Motivated by the conventions and institutions of how and why a person defines themselves as "like" or "not like" someone else forms a kind of self boundary. This is usually a somewhat intentional self defining. As in the cases of :
I am a mother.
or I'm a member of the N.R.A.
There is almost an infinity of these types of self definitions. Each of which may involve strong opinions complete with very exclusive roles, duties and obligations. The interesting thing about opinions is that opinions sometimes can change for individuals as they invariably do in societies as well. These shifts can be observed and appreciated for the larger scale transformations that occur in the world. Granted we may all believe that our opinion biases are the right ones. But generally, "Everyone has blind spots and every ones blind spots are different." (Second axiomatic rule of the para psychological method, more on this later.)
There are as well a whole group of persistent conflicts of opinion that are what I have identified as "Vital Paradoxes." These are just to important to dismiss. This is where I get to show a little tact. Questions like;
Does God exist, (personal or otherwise?)
Are there any real psychics?
Is there a shadow government?
Are large businesses inherently corrupt or just unregulated?
Can intelligent people disagree about important issues or is there always going to be someone to blame for being wrong?
I tried to use questions that reflect peoples strong opinions on both extremes and as yet we can have intelligent people defending both opposing biases. It is particularly interesting to notice what people of different biases can agree about. This can be the thing that says we can both be right, or, that both people are in fact wrong, but they don't know it. Two very different people can agree on a commonly shared opinions that are just not true. Confronting a popular myth can be very hard. Some common prejudices die very reluctantly.
I am primarily interested in those areas of debate concerned with the dialogue about uncertainties and evolving events. We are confronted with limited data and conflicting agendas that prevent people from understanding. Not to mention peoples ignorance, (More on the "Void of Uncertainty" later.)
My job as an entertainment medium and as a psychic requires me to be able to provide alternative perspectives. Peoples opinions in fact can be as varied and nuanced as a fingerprint. I find the whole issue of self defined boundary definitions are a particularly fertile ground for investigating people. What people think about themselves matters, right or wrong.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Is there anybody out there?