Diokine
Member
- Joined
- Mar 2, 2016
- Messages
- 624
When looking at a system that is hypercomplex and difficult to define or explain, one will often find deficiencies in understanding that lead to mistakes or errors in judgement. This is especially true under imperfect communication. Statistically speaking, do you think one is likely to be more or less correct in their assumptions than the majority of other agents interpreting their reality? This is close to the foundation of rationality, which Dr. Peat defined as "thinking that something is true just because you thought of it."
In regards to authority - an appeal to the authority of a figure to acquire influence in a market is closely tied with rationality. Authoritarianism differs from authoritativeness in the sense that authoritarianism implies that the figure or image is the source of truth or agency. The figure of authority is thus seen to have the "true" light, illuminating all so errors will be made plainly obvious. It's akin to claiming the light you provide casts no shadows. Figures of authority typically can't tolerate perspectives other than ones generated by the image, and the image of authority must be maintained. This can be a grave error and can progress to despotism.
In regards to authority - an appeal to the authority of a figure to acquire influence in a market is closely tied with rationality. Authoritarianism differs from authoritativeness in the sense that authoritarianism implies that the figure or image is the source of truth or agency. The figure of authority is thus seen to have the "true" light, illuminating all so errors will be made plainly obvious. It's akin to claiming the light you provide casts no shadows. Figures of authority typically can't tolerate perspectives other than ones generated by the image, and the image of authority must be maintained. This can be a grave error and can progress to despotism.