Adventures in Thought Space

  It may seem strange that someone would create a philosophy that emphasizes avoiding wrong beliefs over finding correct ones ( extralogical reasoning , ER, calls this  pragmatic unwrongness ). It might seem stranger that he would then base a religion on that philosophy. Most people associate religions exclusively with ontologies (studies of being) and ethics (philosophies of action), and not at all wit h epistemologies (philosophies of knowing). Nearly all religions and other “universal” philosophies invalidate themselves from the first by failing to construct an epistemology that undergirds the others in respective order, as universal philosophies should (this, of course, does not mean all ELEMENTS of them are invalid). Religion’s lack of epistemology is clearly due to its absence everywhere else.   Extralogical reasoning reengineers your thinking for  Pragmatic unwrongness . This distinguishes it from “super-logical reasoning,” reasoning that emphasizes correctne...

There’s a difference between diagnosing people and understanding them. Many don’t know the difference. Often it seems the more one learns of the former, the less perspective they have on the latter.    KNOWING means knowing the facts; UNDERSTANDING means knowing how they fit together. Diagnosing is implicitly synonymous with understanding but actually means knowing how the facts fit a preconceived model in a highly inexact science. PSYCHOLOGICALLY, understanding is all that’s required. At best, diagnosing is a means to that end. Even PSYCHIATRICALLY, precise dialogistic specificity is rarely if ever necessary. Basic reasoning alone tells you diagnostics are catalysts for confusion and bias--that is, twisting the facts AWAY from each other.           That said, extralogical reasoning (ER), or at least its creator, does not wholesale “reject” psychiatric diagnoses, nor deny that there may be “good” reasons they exist.  More than ...