Today, we are going to fix a loophole in ARGUMENT.
Should take about ten minutes.
Brief Table of Contents
PART 1
I. Argument: what it is, does, etc. definition - structure - function - purpose
II. Loophole: what went wrong internet -examples - analysis - interlude
III. Troubleshooting: how it went wrong controller test - linearity test - axis test - wrap-up report
PART 2 (to be continued)
IV. Repairs: what the fix is, does, etc. purpose - function - structure - definition
V. Road Test: how to deploy the fix compass - equations - dance steps - LoRC
I. Argument
Definition
Argument is a shared method for solving shared problems. It runs on rational transparency.
Structure
Reading a rational argument is a linear experience.
Bi-directional, yes, but still linear.
Function
As with written words,
arguments are read left-to-right
agruments are are checked right-to-left (see it?)
arguments can be daisy-chained, like these words I have just written,into ever more elaborate structures, which not only capture complex, multifactorial relationships, but which are also capable of being
1. disassembled, for rigorous re-inspection; 2. re-assembled, for trusted operation; and 3. summarized, for easy portability:
…that is, argumentsstack.
Purpose
Argument, shared argument, is the world’s most powerful joint problem-solving system.
The entire system is in FULL VIEW. Everything in the open, nothing hidden.
The viewing angle is IRRELEVANT. Everyone uses the same linear controls.
The logic of argument is TIMELESS. Anyone who knows how it works can contribute.
Participation ADDS POWER. More eyes increase the odds of finding great solutions.
Amazing, amazing stuff.
So what went wrong?
II. Loophole
Internet
The internet happened. That’s what went wrong.
As society hyperconnected itself, Argument suffered four catastrophic setbacks:
velocity: information is flying by way too fast
signal-to-noise: too many people are shouting at once
polarization: everyone has their own facts & definitions
despair: there’s NO WAY to tell what is true
First slowly, then quickly, then all at once, the Internet Jungle took back control.
And argument was lost!
Examples
(imagine smugness)
“Hold on, that’s not MY definition of argument.” “Polarization!” Perfect example.
“I’ve got 876 experts, WITH evidence, on my side.” ”Signal-to-noise!”I’ve got 987 experts on MY side.
“I disagree, but what’s the point in arguing? I’ll never persuade YOU.” “Despair!” Another great example.
Analysis
Argument, it turns out, has a hidden loophole: it is only persuasive under certain specific conditions. Today’s internet scales well past those conditions. This overwhelms the process of argument itself, leaving everyone to deal with a bunch of Angry Idiots.
Lucky for us, people tend to calm down and get a lot smarter once their problems actually start getting solved.
(there is hope for democracy yet)
Fixing Argument’s hidden loophole is the first step toward solving a whole host of entangled problems.
Where do we start?
With aspirin, and with elephants.
Interlude
"Why is an elephant huge, gray, rough, and hairy?” ”If it were small, white, smooth, and hairless, it’d be an aspirin."
Some dualities are trivial. Absurd, throwaway jokes.
Others, however, are wondrous, intricate puzzle-boxes, arriving with their opening instructions sealed secretly inside.
Or, perhaps, hidden in the throwaway jokes.
Argument is Aspirin world
Aspirin world is a clean-room Lab. An orderly, protected bubble of time and space in which Argument can safely take place.
bounded
certain
unhurried
left-to-right
Tiny but enormously powerful, Aspirin world is The Mouse that Roared.
Internet is Elephant country
Elephant country is a vast and sprawling wilderness. Bursting with untamed vitality, it screams “danger, disorder, adventure!”
open-world
uncertain
lightning-fast
chaotic
Elephant country offers us astonishing freedom and prosperity, IF we can learn to navigate its risks.
We need both
Once upon a time, Aspirin world invented Rational Argument. It carved out a private clearing in the Internet Jungle, built a clean-room Laboratory there, locked out the Elephants, and went on to build great things.
But Aspirin world got complacent! The Elephants of Internet Jungle reclaimed their lost territory. They trampled their way in, overran the Lab, and crushed the aspirin underfoot.
We need our Elephants to consume the aspirin dust.
III. Troubleshooting
Grab your circuit-testers, we’re checking argument components.
Controller test: PASS
Pre-internet Argument is a miracle of linear compaction.
It packs three functions—timeless logic, a “joint problem-solving” purpose, and shared facts & definitions—onto a single, shared axis, which it then equips with a basic linear controller.
Linearized systems are great! They allow for intuitive control. Press the buttons to shuttle the basic controller back and forth along Argument’s precision-engineered triple rails!
One axis to check everything, and everything checked on one axis.
A basic controller is a big win for Argument.
Linearity test: MOSTLY PASS
Three of the four Aspirin/Elephant dualities are already linear-compatible.
In theory, linear Argument solves these easily:
If your Argument is
too narrow? GO BACK, widen your frame, and argue FORWARD again.
too slow? Rational transparency is timeless, not instant. GO BACK, revisit points 1 and 2, and craft a better argument.
But none of this works (anymore) in practice.
Why not?
Axis test: FAIL
A linear controller needs its shared axis to stay shared, or the whole system grinds to a halt.
THAT is Argument’s hidden loophole.
“Information is flying by way too fast, everyone has their own facts & definitions, and there’s NO WAY to tell what is true.”
And as society hyperconnected itself, that loophole triggered a cascading system failure that took down Argument in spectacular fashion.
Wrapup Report
As with most engineering disasters, the loss of Argument was unforeseen at the time, yet entirely predictable in hindsight.
Here is the timeline:
Society hyperconnects online. People flock to their personal interests. “I can download anything I desire!”
Hyper-personalization shatters the red rail. We pick and choose the FACTS & DEFINITIONS we prefer. “Where do you find such odd ideas?”
Linear fact-checking collapses. A shattered axis robs “GO BACK” of its shared meaning. “That’s clearly not true, you’re lying!”
The basic controller derails. All of Argument grinds to a halt. “Why won’t you listen to reason?”
Traffic halts on the blue rail. LOGIC loses shared checkability. “Get professional help. You’re deranged, irrational. Unhinged!”
Traffic halts on the green rail. PURPOSE loses shared checkability. “Are you some kind of Crypto-fascist?”
Bottom line:
The Internet “lost” Argument by shattering society’s shared axis of “facts & definitions” into a million misaligned pieces. This exploited a hidden loophole, wrecked Argument’s linear controls, and destroyed its joint problem-solving credibility.
That is what we need to fix.
IV. Repairs
(to be continued)
I will link the second half once it is published.
Boost the Algo! Please subscribe to help others find my work.
