You are viewing a single comment's thread from:

RE: Magic the Gathering cards banned for 'racism'

We'll have to get a 'common sense' topic going sometime.

When most people say "common sense" I believe it would be more precise to say either "common knowledge" or "seems intuitive to me".

And while "common knowledge" and "personal intuition" can be useful at times, they are most often NOT the result of rigorous logical scrutiny (and often stand as a barrier to analysis).

Sort:  

sense sĕns►
n.
Any of the faculties by which stimuli from outside or inside the body are received and felt, as the faculties of hearing, sight, smell, touch, taste, and equilibrium.
n.
A perception or feeling produced by a stimulus; sensation.

The fact that we name it 'Common' doesn't necessarily mean that it is common for commoners. It simply means that it is available to anyone. How is it available, to anyone? Logic. By use of Logic. Applying logic, will produce a 'common' result, no matter the one applying it. As long as it is logical, it will be 'common'. So the way I see it is that if someone is not applying logic to situations, they will not have common sense. 'sense'. They can 'learn', but that is not really 'sense' is it?

Applying logic, will produce a 'common' result, no matter the one applying it.

Only (IFF) the people who are "reasoning" all agree on explicit primary AXIOMS.

The most common miscommunications are when people violently disagree about hackneyed conclusions, without first taking the time to hash out their definitions (PRIMARY AXIOMS).

What's referred to as "common sense" is almost inevitably what one party considers "obvious" and therefore either "goes without saying" (non-explicit) or is so "fundamental" it's "pointless to try and explain" (which is an appeal to ignorance).

first taking the time to hash out their definitions

Bingo.
Now, is it logical, to not first hash out the definitions?

Now, is it logical, to not first hash out the definitions?

I find a lot of people consider it "common sense" that it's a "waste of time" to try and make their definitions explicit.

Yes and that is probably 'most' people. I am guilty of not clarifying, but not because of the 'waste of time' factor, but because of an aspect of the 'Dunning Kruger' effect, which has 2 sides to it. I automatically assume that people know the definitions of things that I am saying, and I forget, that most people will act like they 'know' even when they don't, for fear of appearing 'stupid'. So they play along, acting like they understood you, and actually never do. So the communication becomes a 'waste of time' anyways, other than to be fluffy small talk.

Yep. I tend to believe each individual has their own personal glossary, which they've never made explicit and are loathe to divulge.

Indeed. It causes me to often resort to this :

INTP  fake argument in head.png