“the title was boring” !
- What do you think about the title ?
I have always imagined the word “boring” associated with lengthy time. A title is too short to deduce and bother if it is boring or not.
- Why do you think different ?
This is an example of bringing in “our own reality” as per our own presumptions to expect from the session based on the title.
- Illusion, you mean ? How can reality be subjective ?
Clearly, you have attended many hours fixating your stare to Mrs. Boredom while some others enjoyed their time. Now that, is subjective.
- Mrs – that’s so feminist of you ! Who’s the husband ?
Well, that would be Mr. Wisdom.
- And their children are Kingdoms, of multiple subjective realities. Now that, sounds reasonable.
There is reason why evolution made brains of Homo Sapiens to think so. Each brain extrapolates its experiences on past sessions by titles to estimate the new one, that “time would tell” the test results tallying with truth. Tests can fail. This is a way of learning.
- Fail ! That’s why, as a part of professional development, we should not impose our own reality onto our communication. This makes it collaborative. So, is it wrong to have preconceived ideas ?
It is not the method, but the result of preconception or “our reality”, that is warned to be possibly wrong. Preventing to create preconceived ideas is to stop learning.
- How is the correction applied then ?
We need to keep an open mind that the result of our preconception can turn out to be wrong. It is this ability to change preconceived ideas that is called continual learning. Not applying such, turns the presumption into prejudice.
- Hmm. Is that all ?
Oh, no. I must add that this was also an example of self-talk.
- Self-talk ?! Am I crazy ?
Sounds like crazy split personality, huh ! Split it is, but of course not crazy, because you are aware that I am you and you are me. We’re a pair of self-talker and self-helper. You may like to read the previous post of Mr.Headrick. Trust me, he didn’t need a doctoral dissertation to lecture on it – that’s just a reference in case you didn’t believe him.
- I’d surely read it. Now please summarize what you’ve said.
Okay, there are 3 levels of preconceptions, as given below.
- Assumption – “If my suspicion is true, then this may happen, otherwise that may happen.” Here, alternate option is suggested, as if it has similar or underivable probability.
- Presumption – “Hopefully, my suspicion is true so that this will happen.” Here, alternate option and/or its result is overlooked, as if it has low probability.
- Prejudice – “I do never believe my suspicion can be false, so this must happen.” Here, alternate option is repudiated, as if it has zero probability.
Such temporal reasoning modelled by realizing the conditional distribution of probability over the changing states of the world, also appertains to Dynamic Bayesian Network (DBN) in AI.
- Plain English, please ?
In short, such is learning by probabilistic reasoning over time as the learner’s brain accumulates the past and observes the present in order to guesstimate the future.
- Therefore, it is not bad but good to have our own reality, but it is bad to rely on them completely.
Now, you have got the complete talk.