Fabrizio J. Bonsignore syntotic
2012-05-23 04:33:38 UTC
NOs (bigger sector) vs YESs (1-x sector). The NOs are defeated by
default, the YESs are victorious by default (axiomatic assumption: the
statement is TRUE). Now let the Nos make all possible objections to
the statement while the YESs refute the refutations and assert the
original idea by default. At random (endogenously driven) points in
time, synchronize and ask the original mind-inceptor to make a
decision (and further the theme). Then let a third party EVALUATE the
state of the matter, by any method, say, (basically), cost-benefit of
adopting the issue. Til it is clear the statement is either wrong or
This method should yield fair assessments of the matter with maximum
branching and maximum positive development under minimization of
decision errors and prejudiced NOs.
Any valiant to math the expectations of error type I & II?
This seems to be the Electoral College method. But it can be used as
think tank development method.
Note the the NOs have to be defeated beforehand to give the statement
a chance! The statment will be applied axiomatically to Reality no
matter what (unless the error is evident to all parties). All YESs
have to assume the statement is AXIOMATICALLY TRUE to guarantee
**enough** counterrefutation arguments. No chamnges of heart allowed!
IE, once argumentation begins, all YESs have to defend the statement
even against Reality (fantasy creativity) til a contradiction of terms
is observed _repeatedly_.
This method ought to work better for positive propositions.
Sorry for not delivering the Imports essay yet. I need my REFERENCES.
The assumption is of course that the original statement contains no
error despite arguments against, ie, it is the best course of action.
It should better the chances for the whole population to make a
Danilo J Bonsignore