The Questions · the self · false logic
How do we know what we know?
If flawless reasoning on a bad premise produces confident ruin, then the interesting work is not on the reasoning at all.
Guard the inputs.
Admit bad knowledge at the base and the reasoning that runs on it spirals confidently into ruin.
What this settles
Which makes intake the place to stand. Of everything the practice checks, this is the one that catches the most — because everything downstream of it inherits whatever got through.
Not this question
If their logic is that good, why does it drive them off cliffs?
Also in this footing, and a different question. That one is the engine. This one is the door the fuel comes in by.
Also asked as
- Where did this come from? When did I let this in?
- do I want this to be true?
- What was the question that was never put?
Where this is worked out
Guard the Inputs
The Question That Was Never Put
Items without a link are sessions, shorts, strand reads or frameworks that live as video or audio rather than as pages. Everything Philosophy Zero puts out is listed on the Shelf.
Nothing on this page is composed. Every sentence in the answer is drawn from the pieces listed above. Where a claim is compressed, it is compressed from one of them and adds nothing they do not say.
False logic
Perfect reasoning on a rotten premise — the spiral it runs in both directions, the audit that guards the inputs, and the exit, which is not an argument. 2 of the 4 here have been worked through; the rest are on the map and not yet walked.
- If their logic is that good, why does it drive them off cliffs?walked
- Can you think your way out of a spiral?answered, not written up
- Depression is the dangerous end of the map. The bright end is the safe one.stated, never asked