See when to step aside!
STOP
See when to learn more.
CAUTION
See when to jump in!

GO

Increase the odds that what we anticipate actually happens.
Sort the relevant from the irrelevant        Eliminate logical absurdities         Seek predictions with the best odds


Installation of mental software

NEEDED:
However:
For example:
(links—use "Back" to return)
Identify what's relevant and what's not.
Even  the "obvious" can go pervasively and perpetually unseen.
What can we observe that can predict sunburn?
Generate all the alternatives.
Systematically!
Everybody forgets to do it, occasionally if not usually.
PAP
The quickest route to self-deception
Avoid self-deception.
Wishful thinking can blind the intellect.
Ever played the lottery?
Is this anyone you know?
Extend your perceptions.
But first, you must learn what your perceptions already show you.
Everybody misses this!
And this!
And look at this.
And try this.
Avoid confusing "some" with "all."
Easy, you say!
Perhaps not.
Advertisers regularly assume you will goof on this one.
Avoid confusing necessity and sufficiency.
Even harder!
New Agers and scientists alike sometimes goof here.
Avoid looking silly.
Can't always be done.
Here's why.
Think.
Deeper.
.
 *NEW* Discover the power levels beyond language.
If you don't actually see it—but only learn it—you'll probably think it's not real.
It's the abstract reality of math and science.
A fable about man, energy and magic.
Mind dancing into magic.

 

(Advanced installation information)

Here are some underlying mechanisms for the above:
(These are "edge of human comprehension" insights.)

Correctly identify Boolean relationships. Very often not "seen."  X
Don't invert implications (special case of above). The least often "seen" of the above distinctions. X
Eliminate contradictions. Not "seen" when installation of the Boolean software wasn't complete. (Herpes simpletonisus)  X
Recognize, and attend to, multiple dimensionality. Not "seen" when only scalars are seen when vectors and tensors are being looked at.  X
Extrapolate to unattainable limits. Not "seen" by physics students who believe "Motion implies a force," and by Piaget's subjects who didn't discover (for themselves) what those physics students didn't understand.  X
Multiplicative negations. Not "seen" by he who says, "I could care less!" X
Ratio & proportions. Not "seen" by he who adds and subtracts when he should multiply and divide.  X (new link coming)
Mutual reciprocity and what it implies. Not "seen" by he who denies any possibility of his own contribution to the conflict.  X



 

Here's something that can reveal interesting differences in the ways different people perceive the world:

In a group, ask everyone to explain what the opposite of some word is.  Choose somewhat abstract words, like: abstract, complex, skepticism, good, red, science, just, white, self-interest, competitive, fair (as in "fair weather"), wild, . . .


for example:

Question:  What's the opposite of "complex"?

Several people once discussed their answers to this question and discovered that about half of the group felt "simple" is the best answer.  The other half felt "easy" is the only answer.  The first group couldn't convince the second group that more than one answer is possible.