September 2, 2010
- How do you test something -
that only works reliably when you do not doubt it?
How do you test something that responds to doubt with failure, but at the same time, does not reliably respond to belief with success?
You cannot test such a thing through attempts at making it fail. It will respond to your attempts as inputs and fail accordingly. Garbage in, garbage out.
Not being able to test it in this usual way, how can one learn more about it?
How can one learn whether it can be improved upon?
If it turns out that it can be improved, how does on learn to go about improving it?
You mean like faith?
Comment by Ted — September 2, 2010 @ 3:28 pm
Something like that, yeah. Just some questions that have been running through my mind lately, pathways along which I am looking for some secret passages.
Comment by Ian — September 3, 2010 @ 11:01 am
>> How do you test something that responds to doubt with failure?
Beer, lots of it. :)
*
Related (possibly?):
If the fault indicator is broken, how do you tell?
Comment by speedbird — September 3, 2010 @ 2:00 pm
You don’t test it. It tests you.
Comment by cadeveo — September 5, 2010 @ 2:54 pm
Hey Cadeveo! How the Hell are you?
Comment by Ted — September 5, 2010 @ 9:49 pm
@speedbird: liquid courage, eh? :) And there is no reliable fault indicator. What does THAT mean?
@cadeveo: Nail, meet hammer. That is well said.
And so I guess it must follow that learning more about it is accomplished only by learning more about yourself. And the same goes for improving it.
Comment by Ian — September 6, 2010 @ 12:27 pm