Reasons and background
- Obedience to Authority
- The Trial
- The Bifurcation
- Emerging buds of May
Karl Popper, In his critique of Marx, put forth one of the most important lessons to be gained from his writings: "throughout the history of advocacy and controversy the approach of even genius, has been to seek out and attack the weak points in an opponent´s case." This has severe disadvantages. Every case has weaker as well as stronger parts, and its appeal lies, obviously, in the latter; so to attack the former may embarrass its adherents but not undermine the considerations on which their adherence largely rests. This is one of the reasons why people so rarely change their views after losing an argument.
Often the longer two people go on arguing the stronger and louder each side´s case becomes, for each is all the time being improved by the other´s criticism. What Popper aims to achieve, is to seek out and attack an opponent´s case at its strongest. Indeed, before attacking it he tries to strengthen it still further, he gives it the benefit of every doubt, passes over any obvious loopholes, and then having got into the best-argued position he can, attacks it at its most powerful and appealing. This method of argument, the most intellectually advanced is thrilling; and its results, when successful, are devastating. No perceptible version of the defeated case is reconstructable in the light of highly targeted criticism, every known resource and reserve of substance being already present in the demolished version.
Pointing out obvious weaknesses itself is not a strong strategy for innovation. That task is inevitably much more difficult. Only when one has surpassed the status quo, has acquired the most contemporary knowledge, experience, and feedback in all the necessary fields, and further has within them the intuition and lateral ability necessary to improve the current model, will there be positive change.
It is essential that those watching the endeavoring debates know who are the current authorities and are able to distinguish them from the emerging entourage who challenge them for position. Like in the stock markets it is vital to know who is rising rapidly, who is static, and who is falling. Therefore a natural self-organizing self-regulating hierarchy becomes an integral part of the process of emergence. This process must allow the observers to rapidly amend their preferred choices as the combatants vie for authority.