# Dface's Discussion of "Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors" **URL:** \ **Category:** Friendly\ **Created:** [August 6, 2026, 4:20pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229 "2026-08-06T16:20:01Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 4:20pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/1 "2026-08-06T16:20:01Z")
**Topic Summary:** Here I’ll discuss the following article: [Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492) **Goal:** Write and think more about the topic **CF Relevance:** Learn about judging your own errors ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 7:07pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/2 "2026-08-06T19:07:37Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > What can you do about this? I think “this.” Means what was said in the previous paragraph about knowing the impact of solutions in retrospect. I think I can replace this to say something like this: What can you do about usually only knowing the impact of the solution in retrospect? Here’s the paragraph after the quote above: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > There’s no perfect solution. You have to make fallible judgment calls. First sentence: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > There’s no perfect solution. I think if you come up with a solution, it’ll work to some extent. But there might still be some downsides to it. That or youll maybe find out more about whats bad about the issue. Second sentence: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > You have to make fallible judgment calls. I think I see now how judgement calls can be fallible. Like you dont know everything yet about an issue in the beginning. You can make a judgement call to fix an issue, but you probably dont know all the benefits and downsides to it yet. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 7:30pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/3 "2026-08-06T19:30:35Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > The ideal thing to do is automatize dealing with easy problems. I get it now why you want to automatize dealing with easy problems. I was thinking this quote was a direct response to how to deal with perfectionism mentioned a few paragraphs ago. But because now I learned about the impact of solutions and knowing those in retrospect, I see the connection of the quote to the ideas. I think the paragraphs before the quote above explain the problem, and now the quote above provides a solution for perfectionism. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 7:45pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/4 "2026-08-06T19:45:39Z")
Imma be analyzing this quote: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Figure out the standard patterns of error and deal with them in ways that you can reuse with little effort. There’s standard patterns of error? Does that mean you can figure out the patterns of error in any topic? Like when you start learning a new topic thats kinda unrelated, you can easily identify the same patterns there? Is that why some “geniuses” can pick something up and learn pretty quickly? There’s two parts to the solution: You figure out the standard patterns of error + you deal with them in a way you can reuse with little effort. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 7:55pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/5 "2026-08-06T19:55:43Z")
This is the following quote imma write about: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Then you can deal with minor errors cheaply, and you’ll have much less reason to try to ignore errors. This to me seems like the impact of a solution. If you automatize dealing with easy problems then you can do what’s described in the quote above. Also, after reading the quote above I can see why it’s so difficult to start a new skill for me. I dont think I deal with minor errors cheaply. It takes some good effort to learn something that looked easy to do. I think that’s why im kind of a perfectionist. I’m worried if a small error is gonna f me up. I think if youre a perfectionist and you learn how to deal with minor errors cheaply, you’ll have less reason to ignore errors that come up. You already deal with small errors well. The error you just encountered is probably an actual error ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 10:39pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/6 "2026-08-06T22:39:46Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Bad choices about how to begin can prevent getting to a good situation where you don’t run into too many hard, time-consuming problems to deal with. Bad choices about how to begin getting good at solving easy problems I think. What are those bad choices? I can’t think of anything? I think maybe starting a big project where the person is going to do something really difficult is a bad choice. This is what the bad choices can prevent: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > getting to a good situation where you don’t run into too many hard, time-consuming problems to deal with. I see the word “situation” is used in the quote. That situation can determine if you’re gonna deal with really hard problems or maybe problems that are going to challenge you the right amount. In that “good situation,” you’re not gonna run into too many of the kinds of problem that are time consuming and hard. I see in the quote above it describes the problems like this: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > hard, time-consuming problems Do adjectives in a list work the same as an AND operator? Like the problems we’re talking about are the hard AND time consuming ones. I wonder what “time-consuming” means. It’s probably like it takes up a lot of your time that you could be doing other stuff. I see the problems are “hard” but that doesn’t sound that bad on its own. It’s when you’re taking so long on them to solve that it becomes another problem. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 6, 2026, 11:57pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/7 "2026-08-06T23:57:02Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Also, there’s a common problem when people start setting some issues aside to come back to later. They find the list grows much faster than they actually go back to and address any issues they saved for later. Eventually they may realize they’ll never do most stuff that they don’t prioritize immediately. Most things being “now or never” is a bad situation to be in. I swear I read this whole paragraph differently before I started writing about the previous paragraphs. I think what popped up in my mind before was gathering a lot of words that you wanna define later, but then you never get to it cuz you procrastinate or something. Now im thinking you can set aside the issues like you can with errors. Setting aside errors was talked about in the paragraph before the quote above. Here’s the first sentence of the quote above: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Also, there’s a common problem when people start setting some issues aside to come back to later. I see the problem is common. Like, a lot of people deal with it I think. I think the problem is, “deal with the issue later.” How are you going to deal with the issue? When are you going to deal with it? In what order are you going to deal with the issues later? Here’s the subordinate clause of the sentence above: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > when people start setting some issues aside to come back to later. Why are people setting those issues aside? They want to come back to them later? The common problem happens at the time the clause above happens. It doesn’t sound bad at first like they can come back to the issues later, but why do they gotta come back to it later? > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > They find the list grows much faster than they actually go back to and address any issues they saved for later. It’s like they’re not solving stuff fast enough. “the list” is that of the issues they saved for later. So according to the quote above, there’s two rates of two things: The first thing is the list of issues that people set aside. That has a rate of growth. I think they’re putting so many issues aside. The second thing is going back to the list and addressing the issues. The person can do that at a certain rate. The problem is that the list of issues is growing faster than they could solve them. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 7:48am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/8 "2026-08-07T07:48:39Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > To judge which errors are important well, you have to set appropriate goals. Say you’re trying to throw a ball to someone. What exactly is the goal? A reasonable goal is throwing it within arm’s reach of your partner. You might also want to throw it somewhere he can catch it if he runs. But you could have a goal of throwing it to an exact spot in the air in front of him. You could aim for millimeter precision or even literally perfect precision. First sentence: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > To judge which errors are important well, you have to set appropriate goals. You can judge something about errors well. I remember there’s a CF article talking about measuring vs. judging things. I forgot the difference. I wonder what an appropriate goal is. If you set those then you can judge which error is important well. I didnt think goals were so powerful. I thought goals were just things you set and have not much say about anything in particular. I think I never learned how good they could be. A part of me doesnt take them seriously. A part of me sees them as flimsy things. I dont think I know everything about goals so I dont want to judge. I want to know why goals can help you deal with errors. I wanna know how appropriate goals can help you judge which errors are important well. I think I need to see appropriate goals work in action. ---
**Author:** ![Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/elliot/32/14_2.png) [@Elliot](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Elliot)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 5:14pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/9 "2026-08-07T17:14:52Z")
I’m glad to see you posting a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 6:21pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/10 "2026-08-07T18:21:24Z")
Thank you 😄 that article about how to write a lot helped ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 7:53pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/11 "2026-08-07T19:53:32Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Say you’re trying to throw a ball to someone. This sounds like a goal to me. It’s not tht specific tho. It’s like a brief description about what you’re going to do. The quote makes me think it’s a general purpose goal or something like that. > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > What exactly is the goal? This makes sense to me to ask cuz: - Where is this other person? - Is the person running or not? - Where are you throwing it at? - Is the other guy trying to catch it? I think if you talk about the exact goal, you’re bringing more context into it. > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > A reasonable goal is throwing it within arm’s reach of your partner. That’s a reasonable goal cuz then that has the other person catch the ball. Now it seems like you guys are playing something tht involves catching. Idk I think the goal is reasonable cuz you’re trying to throw the ball to be within range. There’s a lot of variance that the action can have. Like you can end up throwing the ball over their head and thats still within arm’s reach. I think the goal is also reasonable cuz it’s not impossible. Like, it’s not under heavy criticism > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > You might also want to throw it somewhere he can catch it if he runs. I think this is another example of a reasonable goal. Idk what makes it reasonable. If he runs it doesnt sound impossible to throw it where he can catch if he runs. I think if something is reasonable then it’s related to reason. I think reason is about ideas being subject to criticism. If an idea isn’t refuted then it’s reasonable I think. Idk I think in the quote above, the goals are reasonable cuz it’s not wrong to think that you got arms that can throw things. It’s not wrong to set up a goal to use your arms to throw things at a reasonable range. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 9:02pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/12 "2026-08-07T21:02:05Z")
This is from the paragraph about setting appropriate goals: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > But you could have a goal of throwing it to an exact spot in the air in front of him. You could aim for millimeter precision or even literally perfect precision. If your goal is too ambitious, you’re always going to have errors because you can never throw a ball to a perfectly exact location even once, let alone learn the skill of throwing that accurately every time. First sentence from the quote above: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > But you could have a goal of throwing it to an exact spot in the air in front of him. I see the sentence starts with, “But.” Does that indicate a contrast? I think it does. It’s a contrast between the last two sentences about throwing the ball within arms reach. Now, you’re trying to throw the ball at an exact location. Thats different. Here’s the goal: Throw the ball at… wait I see that in the quote, the goal has the adjective, “a.” I don’t think we’re talking about a specific goal. We haven’t described the exact spot yet. Idk how you would describe the location of the air in front of your throw partner. That sounds more complicated. Like, if I were to make an exact goal, it would be kind of hard. > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > You could aim for millimeter precision or even literally perfect precision. So you can be as precise as a millimeter. Like, I think that means if you’re aiming for the ball to be 70 millimeters in front of your partner, it can probably be 70.1 millimeters? If you round tht it’s not 71 or 69 millimeters. If im right about the millimeter precision thing, then that’s similar to throwing the ball within arm’s reach of your partner. You throw the ball in both scenarios to be within a range of measurement. You can also have the goal to throw the ball like this: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > or even literally perfect precision. That’s like throwing the ball at literally 70.000000… millimeters in front of your partners face. That sounds impossible to get right once let alone practice. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 9:05pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/13 "2026-08-07T21:05:44Z")
The following sentence is in the paragraph about appropriate goals: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > If your goal is too ambitious, you’re always going to have errors because you can never throw a ball to a perfectly exact location even once, let alone learn the skill of throwing that accurately every time. The first clause: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > If your goal is too ambitious, If you aim for goals of throwing something with perfect precision or with millimeter precision those are too ambitious. Why? It’s hard to tell, but I think it has to do with the way we throw any object. People don’t usually do goals or projects similar to those so how do you think you’re going to be successful at those? Have you measured how precise your throws are? If you don’t already know how precise your throws are, that’s going to make the project more complicated. Idk what ambitious means but i think that has to do with wanting to be really successful. It’s like putting your standards way up to arrive at a goal. This is the next clause: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > you’re always going to have errors (Edit: accidentally published the reply) : The quote above isn’t true if you’re goal isn’t too ambitious. If your goal was instead, “throw a ball to a friend at arm’s reach,” then you’re not gonna run into errors. That’s if he’s not that far away. Your actions are gonna have the desired results. They won’t fail at the goal. You’re always going to have errors in overly ambitious goals cuz there’s always going to be something to correct. Idk if the errors are errors or small errors. The reason why you’re going to always have errors in overly ambitious goals: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > because you can never throw a ball to a perfectly exact location even once, let alone learn the skill of throwing that accurately every time. I see that the ambition is about throwing the ball at a precise location. The overly ambitious goal seems impossible cuz how are you going to throw the ball at a precise location? It’ll be very hard to think of error correcting stuff to get you to your goal. Like, there’s going to be so many errors to look at. Which one do you even focus on? Everything you do is going to seem like it’s wrong. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 7, 2026, 10:39pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/14 "2026-08-07T22:39:20Z")
The following is part of a paragraph from the section called Goal Ambition: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > _Your goal defines which errors are important._ I see that the whole sentence is italicized. Why is the sentence italicized? Why do words get italicized in general? I think the quote above is italicized to highlight an important idea. It’s an important idea in the article. My question is how do goals define errors? I think I see how… Wait, I think I read that wrong. I see goals define which errors are important. An example I think is if you’re throwing the ball to someone who’s running to catch it. The error of throwing it too soon before he even arrives is important to work on. Idk which errors would be unimportant in that scenario. I think maybe if you look at background knowledge and stuff you’ll be able to tell. Maybe if I compare two goals I’ll get a better picture: 1. Throwing the ball to someone stationary at arm’s reach. 2. Throwing the ball to someone running at arm’s reach I think the error of focusing too little or too much power into your throw could apply to both goals. On number two you gotta anticipate where the other person is going to be so the ball makes it to them. Idk > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > If you have a good and clear goal, then all errors/problems – things that would result in _failure at your goal_ – are relevant and worth working on. I wonder what makes a goal good and clear. After reading the sentence tho, it seems that if you got a good and clear goal then that’s what’s going to help you progress in life. Not really when you’re struggling to get one thing right at all. If you have good and clear goals: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > then all errors/problems – things that would result in _failure at your goal_ – are relevant and worth working on. I wonder how many errors/problems is all of them. Like, every one of them?? I think since your goal is good and clear then you would know it’s good to work on an error i think. Idk If you had an unclear and bad goal like one that’s too ambitious then you’ll have so many errors to work on. If you try working on every error/problem then you will get overwhelmed. > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > But if your goal is vague or too perfectionist, then you’ll have to ignore problems (or, better, adjust your goal). The goal can be vague or too perfectionist. I think you’ll have to ignore some problems in perfectionist goals cuz you’ll know about some errors more than others. You can probably come back to them later and see if they’re worth working on maybe. ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2026, 5:11am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/15 "2026-08-08T05:11:23Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > But if your goal is vague or too perfectionist, then you’ll have to ignore problems (or, better, adjust your goal). Your goals can be vague like: - Lose weight - Get better at reading - Type faster - Get good at Dark Souls - Finish Minecraft - Get a new job - Eat healthier - Work on phone addiction - Watch less TV I think goals like “type faster” are vague cuz what if you type at 75 wpm and then you type once at 80 wpm but then you don’t get that again??? What if you type 76 wpm? That’s technically faster, but is that satisfying enough for the goal? “Get a new job” can be vague cuz you can say, “I just want any job.” But what if you were presented with a job you don’t want to take? That makes the goal sound vague. What job do you want? I wonder why you’ll have to ignore problems in a vague goal? In getting a new job, maybe the interview didn’t go well or your resume is not that good, but you don’t know what’s wrong. Idk how you would have to ignore problems in this scenario. But maybe you can adjust your goal here idk ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2026, 5:33am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/16 "2026-08-08T05:33:26Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > You can also make a goal that’s too easy and unambitious like “I want the ball to go forward when I throw it”. You can make goals that are too easy and unambitious like: - Breathe - Eat food - Make a bowl of cereal - Walk forward That’s if you can do that stuff easily > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > “I want the ball to go forward when I throw it”. The ball going forward when you throw it is too easy cuz you don’t really have to think about it to do it. It’s also unambitious cuz you’re already expecting the ball to go forward. You don’t really gotta pay attention to other things for that to work. > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Unless you’ve never thrown a ball before, that’s something you can already do, and it will give you no guidance about what improvements are worth making (since you’re already able to achieve the goal, no improvements matter according to that goal). That goal won’t give you guidance about what to work on. Nothing about improving your aim or the power you throw the ball at. Nothing about how soon to let it go. You can already do it. I think if you had a more ambitious goal then it would give you guidance about what error to look at. If you had the goal of throwing the ball to a running person, then you kind of would know where to look at to make an improvement. If you miss and they don’t catch it, then the error probably is related to the fact that they’re running. You can be like why did I miss? I can throw the ball and make it go forward. What about them running makes it so they don’t catch the ball? Does it have to do with where I throw the ball? Idk ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2026, 11:04pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/17 "2026-08-08T23:04:56Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > ## Binary Goals > > Perhaps the most important concept for judging which errors/problems are worth working on is to look at issues _decisively_ in terms of _which goals will this issue cause failure at_? Here we’re talking about hypothetical or abstract goals, not necessarily _your_ goals. They are goals you _could_ have, but you’ll have to decide which ones to use as your own personal goals and which not to. Here’s the first sentence/question: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Perhaps the most important concept for judging which errors/problems are worth working on is to look at issues _decisively_ in terms of _which goals will this issue cause failure at_? I see the first word of the sentence is: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Perhaps That shows I think that whatever is said ahead of the sentence is a possibility? Maybe it’s what looks right so far for now. Like, it’s not refuted by anything major yet. The next part of the sentence: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > the most important concept for judging which errors/problems are worth working on “Perhaps” applies to the above quote and the rest of the sentence. What does “the most important concept” mean? “The most” means like the highest in order or something. Idk I gotta check. I saw some definitions from Merriam and gemini. I saw gemini quote from a reddit thread to say that “most” means highest in degree or extent. I think concepts are things to be understood and used, so if you do the one that the sentence is talking about then you’ll be able to judge which errors/problems are worth working well. I think this is the most important concept that’s being talked about: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > is to look at issues _decisively_ in terms of _which goals will this issue cause failure at_? I see “_decisively" and "which goals will this issue cause failure at_?” are italicized. That’s probably important. It means something. “issues” are like problems or errors i think. It’s a problem situation probably? Issues can make goals fail. Like, they’re things that cause failure at the goal I think. You can see the sentence like this to give you an idea of what to do: “look at” x “in terms of” y. If you do that then you can kind of know that you can use words to use the most important concept. I think ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 8, 2026, 11:29pm UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/18 "2026-08-08T23:29:00Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > is to look at issues _decisively_ in terms of _which goals will this issue cause failure at_? If you like take the sentence seriously, you’re not even thinking like, “Dang, I keep messing up when I try doing this goal.” Now you can think like, “Which of my goals does this mistake cause failures at?” I think ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2026, 12:13am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/19 "2026-08-09T00:13:09Z")
> [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > Here we’re talking about hypothetical or abstract goals, not necessarily _your_ goals. “Here” means when you’re looking at issues decisively in terms of which goal does this issue cause failure at? The quote above is talking about those goals that may or may not fail at an issue. Those goals are hypothetical or abstract which I don’t know too much what they mean. Hypothetical could mean that it’s not necessarily your goal but like a what if you had that goal? Abstract goals makes me think that you think about goals as an individual thing. Like, an idea that you talk about objectively Edit: This reply was actually to this reply: [Dface's Discussion of "Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors" - #17 by Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/17) ---
**Author:** ![Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/user_avatar/discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/dface/32/3926_2.png) [@Dface](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/u/Dface)\ **Post date:** [August 9, 2026, 1:02am UTC](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229/20 "2026-08-09T01:02:26Z")
The following quote is talking about what kind of goals you could have when you look at issues decisively: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > They are goals you _could_ have, but you’ll have to decide which ones to use as your own personal goals and which not to. “could” is italicized. I think that means that they are goals you can choose or decide to have. You don’t just have to stick to one goal I think. Or just cuz you made up a goal doesn’t mean you have to follow through with it. The second clause of the quote above: > [@Judging and Fixing Your Own Errors](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/492/1): > > but you’ll have to decide which ones to use as your own personal goals and which not to. It’s cool that just cuz it’s a goal doesn’t mean it has to be your goal. It’s similar to ideas where just cuz it’s an idea you have doesn’t mean that you have to stay with it. It doesn’t have to define you [Next page](https://discuss.criticalfallibilism.com/t/dfaces-discussion-of-judging-and-fixing-your-own-errors/2229.md?page=2)