Yeah, I don’t think ideas equal your core self. What is your core self btw? Is that made of ideas too? What does it mean to reject an idea? I can think of an example. Let’s say you had an idea about how to do a math formula. That was your idea, but because you found out there was a mistake in it, you end up correcting it. Is that rejecting your core self? The idea seems like a part of you in a way, but you don’t have too much personal attachment to it so you change it. You just want to get the problem right I think.
Focusing on believing youre already right on other issues sounds like dying in the place of your ideas. Like, what if there’s a mistaken premise but you keep concluding it? It’s going to be hard to truth seek using bad premises. This reminds me of the problem of induction where knowledge creation is thought to be done in one way when it’s in fact done through evolution.
I like the idea of focusing on being good at error correction cuz you can focus on being right. That’s different than supporting your ideas to be true. You’re focusing on being rational and finding the truth. You don’t have to be beholden by one idea for so long. I think of being mistaken as a starting point to be correct. Like, you gotta build up to have proper knowledge.
I wonder how correct these ideals are and the upsides and downsides. How often are they followed by Karl Popper fans vs. Popper himself? I think if this stuff was followed more then it’d be easier to learn and practice rationality on the internet. My question is why aren’t other communities more involved with CF? Those ideals sound perfect to help one interact with CF ideas.