| Research Method |
June 7, 2011 - January 10, 2013
Author: Bart klein Ikink
Introduction
Like most great inventions Natural Money is based on the work of others [+]. Much of the theories on this website can be attributed to others. In many cases my job was combining the result of existing theories and the outcomes of existing experiments. Most notably the Social Trade Organisation (formerly Strohalm Foundation) and their book Poor Because Of Money have been important for the discovery of Natural Money. Message boards have also been indispensable for validating thoughts and theories.
|
The theory of Natural Money itself has been shaped by discussions on the message boards of IEX.nl between 2001 and 2008. Likewise discussions on the message boards of Maroc.nl between 2009 and 2011 were helpful in improving the theories about religion and the order of the universe. Without the Internet this project would not have been possible.
The idea of Hegelian dialectic states that conflicts between different viewpoints can be resolved as there is an underlying truth. Things are the way they are and opinions do not change that. Most viewpoints are based on facts. Two apparently opposite viewpoints are sometimes apparently both true. Considering that many scientific findings, ideologies, philosophies and religions contain a certain amount of truth, there should be no conflict between them on a higher level.
Limits of thinking
People tend to believe only things that fit their views. When beliefs are challenged with facts, most people do not alter their opinions and do not incorporate the new information into their thinking. Instead, when convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, the beliefs of most people tend to get stronger [+]. It is part of the survival instinct to have a world view. It allows people to act in certain situations. This explains why people tend to cling to their world view. World view like intuition is the outcome of biological laws and the survival of the fittest. Genes that do not produce an adequate world view or intuition will die out.
A world view is a model of reality but it is not reality itself. Reality is complicated and the number of possible perspectives is unlimited. It takes time to analyse reality extensively and in many situations there is too little time for an elaborate analysis. An adequate world view is a world view that helps to survive. It does not have to be comprehensive or correct. For example, many Israelis think that Iran intends to wipe Israel off the map. This does not have to be true but from a survival perspective this could be a reasonable assessment.
Crowds are often better at guessing than experts [+]. Crowds may sense phenomena better than scientists and experts. Proverbs can provide a more profound insight than scientific research or expert knowledge. Some things are true but they cannot be proven scientifically. This is especially true for prophetic predictions, premonition, seeing ghosts, synchronicity, clairvoyance, reincarnation and miracles. To sceptics, proving that fraud or a physiological cause is possible is sufficient evidence for fraud or a physiological cause. People that have experienced supernatural events mostly think otherwise.
Hegelian dialectic
The idea of Hegelian dialectic states that conflicts between different viewpoints can be resolved because there is an underlying truth. Things are the way they are and opinions do not change that. Most viewpoints are based on facts. Considering that many scientific findings, ideologies, philosophies and religions contain a certain amount of truth, there should be no conflict between them on a higher level. Hegelian dialectic has a bad name because it is associated with Marxism. Hegelian dialectic is an important tool of truth finding, but it requires people to accept facts as they are and not to ignore the arguments of others.
Cultural tensions are partly caused by differences in world views that are often based on religions and ideologies. When beliefs are challenged with facts then most people do not alter their opinions and do not incorporate the new information into their thinking. Instead, when convictions are challenged by contradictory evidence, the beliefs of most people tend to get stronger. A truth finding exercise can resolve many cultural, religious and ideological disagreements. Hegelian dialectic can be helpful to guide this process.
The idea of Hegelian dialectic states that conflicts between different viewpoints can be resolved because there is an underlying truth. Most viewpoints are based on a certain set of facts while other facts are excluded. Considering that many scientific findings, ideologies, philosophies and religions contain a certain amount of truth, there should be no conflict between them on a higher level. This truth finding exercise requires that all participants accept the facts as they are and do not ignore valuable elements in the arguments of others.
A few examples may illustrate this. Socialists think that owners of capital live of the labour of others. According to capitalists, capital and risk taking are needed, otherwise nothing gets done and everybody remains poor. The underlying truth is that wealth is not distributed based on need or achievement because of interest on money. According to the Creation Story God created this universe 6,000 years ago in six days. According to the Evolution Theory human life evolved by accident in a process that lasted billions of years. The underlying truth is that we are simulations in a virtual reality.
Assumption based causal reasoning
Scientific reasoning has gained predominance because it produces results. Assumption based causal or model based reasoning is common in science. Any model is a limited representation of reality with specific assumptions that may not be correct. The limits of causal or model based reasoning in science can be demonstrated with the following fictional example:
The community counsel was worried about the high number of drowning deaths at the lake and hired a consultant to investigate the issue. After some number crunching the consultant discovered a correlation between drowning deaths and soda consumption at the Lakeside Cafe. As drowning could not cause soda consumption, it must be the other way around, so the consultant advised to close the Lakeside Cafe. |
The example demonstrates that acting on faulty assumptions combined with crappy reasoning can still produce the desired results. When the assumptions are faulty, and the reasoning is crappy, applying the same model in similar situations may not work.
Practical use
Our view on reality is subjective. We can construct a view on reality by using language. If we agree upon definitions we can share our view on reality and communicate about it. Science works in the same way. A scientist starts with definitions of terms to be used in a scientific theory. In science objective reality is not important because science is used to predict events and make decisions based on those predictions. In science the quality of predictions is more important than truth [+].
The elusiveness of objective reality does not mean absence of truth. Truth can exist independent of reality. For example, "1 tree + 1 tree = 2 trees" is always true, if not applied to a specific reality. Applying a truth to a specific reality is problematic because this is a matter of agreement. Calling two different sensual impressions two trees implies a definition of a tree which must be agreed upon. Also all people involved must interpret the sensual impressions as trees and assume that the sensual impressions they all observe are reflections of the same sources. For practical use, this research should be judged by the value of its results.
Personal views
The findings of the research indicate that this universe is a virtual reality used for entertainment and that God is indifferent towards humans. The Bible itself provides ample evidence for that, but many people are still not convinced. I do not have any requests or demands towards God nor do I feel that my opinion is relevant. We are not in the position to judge God and we have to accept the facts the way they are.
I am aware of the feelings that the findings could cause. I have had four years to go through the process of accepting the facts and I cannot change them. Submission is the only way for those who have no power. The Plan For the Future is going to cause turmoil if it will ever be implemented. I would have liked to make a great plan that will make everybody happy, but that seems impossible. The alternative is a collective suicide of humanity.
Emotions can stand in the way of solutions and people need solutions more than nice words. Acting on incidents does not solve things, nor does telling people what they like to hear. Like they say, the road to hell is paved with good intentions, and most good intentions have yielded poor results. I can only do what seems best and hope that it will help other people. I also hope that the needless killing will end one day and that this day will be soon.