Avoiding a Basic Reasoning Flaw in Social Sciences
Feb 2, 2020 8:08:49 GMT -5
Post by Radrook Admin on Feb 2, 2020 8:08:49 GMT -5
Flawed thinking arises when we try to limit the reasons why people prefer some over the other to one solitary reason. The truth is that both both systems have inherent flaws and inherent virtues. One would assume that this reality is so glaring that nobody would fail to see it. Unfortunately, and for some mysterious reason, the untrained human mind tends to be extremely illogical and reaches conclusions which will make it easy to dismiss multiple reasons for one behavior.
I recently stated that Capitalism makes the exploitation of the poor and non-wealthy masses susceptible;e to exploitation and was accuse of loving communism because of ignorance. But is ignorance the only reason why a person notice a flaw in a system? Does finding flaw in communism mean that I don't understand Communism, as well? Or is it that both systems are flawed and mentioning it only indicates that the flaws are noticeable?
Such thinking indicates a lack of basic understanding of the Social Sciences at the most fundamental level. Snce suc is the case I responded to the accusation in he following way:
Your premise that finding flaws in Capitalism means lack of understanding is flawed.
The premise that choosing Communism over Capitalism means not understanding communism is also flawed.
The reason that they are flawed is because of the employment of deontological thinking to the social sciences which arises from a lack of basic understanding of the nature of the social sciences themselves. Social sciences are unlike the natural sciences which are amenable to rule- thinking since one social phenomenon or effect can have multiple causes. Example:
Why does a person enter a theater on a rainy day?
1. To inspect the theatre for any safety violation?
2. To escape boredom?
3. To assassinate someone?
4. To flee the involvement weather?
5. To see if his wife is cheating on him?
6. As a hit man to murder someone?
7. To view the film for a review?
8. To flee domestic turmoil?
9. To meet someone?
10. To flee from the law temporarily?
So trying to pigeonhole a behavior to only one reason in the social sciences just doesn’t work.
Avoiding a Basic Reasoning Flaw in Social Sciences
Communism vs Capitalism
Flawed thinking arises when we try to limit the reasons why people prefer some over the other to one solitary reason. The truth is that both both systems have inherent flaws and inherent virtues. One would assume that this reality is so glaring that nobody would fail to see it. Unfortunately, and for some mysterious reason, the untrained human mind tends to be extremely illogical and reaches conclusions which will make it easy to dismiss multiple reasons for one behavior.
I recently stated that Capitalism makes the exploitation of the poor and non-wealthy masses susceptible;e to exploitation and was accuse of loving communism because of ignorance. But is ignorance the only reason why a person notice a flaw in a system? Does finding flaw in communism mean that I don't understand Communism, as well? Or is it that both systems are flawed and mentioning it only indicates that the flaws are noticeable?
Such thinking indicates a lack of basic understanding of the Social Sciences at the most fundamental level. Snce suc is the case I responded to the accusation in he following way:
Your premise that finding flaws in Capitalism means lack of understanding is flawed.
The premise that choosing Communism over Capitalism means not understanding communism is also flawed.
The reason that they are flawed is because of the employment of deontological thinking to the social sciences which arises from a lack of basic understanding of the nature of the social sciences themselves. Social sciences are unlike the natural sciences which are amenable to rule- thinking since one social phenomenon or effect can have multiple causes. Example:
Why does a person enter a theater on a rainy day?
1. To inspect the theatre for any safety violation?
2. To escape boredom?
3. To assassinate someone?
4. To flee the involvement weather?
5. To see if his wife is cheating on him?
6. As a hit man to murder someone?
7. To view the film for a review?
8. To flee domestic turmoil?
9. To meet someone?
10. To flee from the law temporarily?
So trying to pigeonhole a behavior to only one reason in the social sciences just doesn’t work.