investigation begins with what you know. It is reflected off the unknown thing. We ping it and get a radar ping back, of the shape of the unknown.
We speculate and investigate along those lines. Be clear enough with the self, honest enough with the self, so that if the hearing (science begins with observation) disagrees with the dogma of the backdrop, then the backdrop, the written theory..is wrong or the some part of the backdrop equation is incorrect.
The problem in this case, it is also tied to hearing comprehension.
Comparatively...Think of it as encompassing the concept of reading comprehension.
If you can’t comprehend what you are reading, and the subject is reading, re the observation of anomaly... then the idea of investigation goes out the window. A cornerstone of the investigation moves to being as gobbledygook to the investigator, thus rendering all applied motions to find clarity..useless.
Similarly or in the same moment, comes the properer and logical retreat: if your hearing is not up to snuff, then these investigations move to known dogma, and not into actual investigation.
People without the necessary hearing skills or without exposure to such clarified environments where such a thing can be heard...those people tend to get lost.
And the human mind falls back on what it knows. Nothing wrong with that, it’s worked for life on this planet, for millions of years.
But it does not work here.
For the science to go forward, the given person involved has to have the skills. They must have the hearing skills in order to move forward in the investigation. They must have the capacity to observe what the other investigators are observing, otherwise, no clarity..... and then comes the fallback to dogma, the fallback to the texts of yore.
And that’s not science. It the frailty of human limits.
It’s a personal physical limitation coming to life as conflict.
Conflict with others. Others who have the requisite hearing skills to get to the actual investigation and arrive at the correct answer. That is is anomalous, it is real, and it's not addressed by the known text and known works.
Therefore, logically, re science and investigation....if one does not have the hearing skills to hear it or has not tried to develop the correct methodologies to teach themselves to hear it, then that person is ignorant of the equation set required to be involved in the investigation..... and should.... by all logic and reason - remove themselves from the discussion.
We speculate and investigate along those lines. Be clear enough with the self, honest enough with the self, so that if the hearing (science begins with observation) disagrees with the dogma of the backdrop, then the backdrop, the written theory..is wrong or the some part of the backdrop equation is incorrect.
The problem in this case, it is also tied to hearing comprehension.
Comparatively...Think of it as encompassing the concept of reading comprehension.
If you can’t comprehend what you are reading, and the subject is reading, re the observation of anomaly... then the idea of investigation goes out the window. A cornerstone of the investigation moves to being as gobbledygook to the investigator, thus rendering all applied motions to find clarity..useless.
Similarly or in the same moment, comes the properer and logical retreat: if your hearing is not up to snuff, then these investigations move to known dogma, and not into actual investigation.
People without the necessary hearing skills or without exposure to such clarified environments where such a thing can be heard...those people tend to get lost.
And the human mind falls back on what it knows. Nothing wrong with that, it’s worked for life on this planet, for millions of years.
But it does not work here.
For the science to go forward, the given person involved has to have the skills. They must have the hearing skills in order to move forward in the investigation. They must have the capacity to observe what the other investigators are observing, otherwise, no clarity..... and then comes the fallback to dogma, the fallback to the texts of yore.
And that’s not science. It the frailty of human limits.
It’s a personal physical limitation coming to life as conflict.
Conflict with others. Others who have the requisite hearing skills to get to the actual investigation and arrive at the correct answer. That is is anomalous, it is real, and it's not addressed by the known text and known works.
Therefore, logically, re science and investigation....if one does not have the hearing skills to hear it or has not tried to develop the correct methodologies to teach themselves to hear it, then that person is ignorant of the equation set required to be involved in the investigation..... and should.... by all logic and reason - remove themselves from the discussion.