"INCOMPLETE" is not the same as "INCORRECT".
I am amazed nearly every day by this common oversight in logic when I read various articles and comments about articles, especially coming from so many intelligent people.
"I take issue with this article and the author's observations are wrong; the second paragraph doesn't talk about how my race is equally affected!"
"The author completely forgets about the fact that there is another region in this country that's much different from the place talked about in the article."
"Limes are used for this purpose also, the author is wrong in saying that lemons are used."
"The author obviously has a female-bias and is incorrect in her statistics, she does not mention the fact that men are also abused..."
When a person writes anything at all, or makes any kind of point or observation about anything, OF COURSE it's incomplete! OF COURSE they didn't include every single point, counterpoint, piece of information, point of view, or piece of evidence. There is no work by a human being, EVER, that includes every single facet of a subject, any subject at all.
All each of us can do is share what we see, what we've observed, what we've figured out, what we've noticed specifically, and we can only EFFECTIVELY do that ONE TOPIC AT A TIME.
All each of us can do (ANY of us) is share the VERY LIMITED point of view that we are capable of having as Homo Sapien Sapiens, AND as readers, listeners, and students, it's our responsibility and hopefully, CAPABILITY, to engage with ONE SUBJECT AT A TIME.
There is no document ever, ever written by a human that includes all of the information surrounding that topic or subject, or that states what it does include in COMPLETE ACCURACY.
This expectation of perfection, complete inclusion of every detail that even touches the subject, and incredible, computer-like accuracy is frankly silly, especially since it's not based in any kind of reality.
The person who accuses someone else of being "incorrect" in their observations BECAUSE their article, post, or statement is INCOMPLETE would not ever, ever be able to form a statement, write a paper, document, or article, or express their meaning in a COMPLETE FORM, including every point of view, every fact, every effect, every piece of history surrounding the topic, etc, etc. NEVER MIND the things regarding the topic that aren't actually KNOWN or UNDERSTOOD by any humans.
Seriously. It's ridiculous, very counter productive, and all about ego (the inflated kind), not information exchange or discovery.
I am amazed nearly every day by this common oversight in logic when I read various articles and comments about articles, especially coming from so many intelligent people.
"I take issue with this article and the author's observations are wrong; the second paragraph doesn't talk about how my race is equally affected!"
"The author completely forgets about the fact that there is another region in this country that's much different from the place talked about in the article."
"Limes are used for this purpose also, the author is wrong in saying that lemons are used."
"The author obviously has a female-bias and is incorrect in her statistics, she does not mention the fact that men are also abused..."
When a person writes anything at all, or makes any kind of point or observation about anything, OF COURSE it's incomplete! OF COURSE they didn't include every single point, counterpoint, piece of information, point of view, or piece of evidence. There is no work by a human being, EVER, that includes every single facet of a subject, any subject at all.
All each of us can do is share what we see, what we've observed, what we've figured out, what we've noticed specifically, and we can only EFFECTIVELY do that ONE TOPIC AT A TIME.
All each of us can do (ANY of us) is share the VERY LIMITED point of view that we are capable of having as Homo Sapien Sapiens, AND as readers, listeners, and students, it's our responsibility and hopefully, CAPABILITY, to engage with ONE SUBJECT AT A TIME.
There is no document ever, ever written by a human that includes all of the information surrounding that topic or subject, or that states what it does include in COMPLETE ACCURACY.
This expectation of perfection, complete inclusion of every detail that even touches the subject, and incredible, computer-like accuracy is frankly silly, especially since it's not based in any kind of reality.
The person who accuses someone else of being "incorrect" in their observations BECAUSE their article, post, or statement is INCOMPLETE would not ever, ever be able to form a statement, write a paper, document, or article, or express their meaning in a COMPLETE FORM, including every point of view, every fact, every effect, every piece of history surrounding the topic, etc, etc. NEVER MIND the things regarding the topic that aren't actually KNOWN or UNDERSTOOD by any humans.
Seriously. It's ridiculous, very counter productive, and all about ego (the inflated kind), not information exchange or discovery.
