Skip to main content

The Should Fallacy

In the history of this world, there is perhaps no form of marketing or protracted syntactical destruction that could ever aspire to achieve as much as the word should has attained in the English language.

As much as we rely upon language to convey and interpret meaning, those messages are only worth as much validity as they carry with them. 

In dissemination, the remainder becomes hollow conventional wisdom.

As it turns out, many purveyors of the word should have been selling you ideological snake oil.

The Should Fallacy

All beliefs are harnessed through axiomatic distinctions. This author claims not to have any solutions to this world's many perceived problems, as no honest economist will report anything more than a menu of tradeoffs; moreover, I represent only my own beliefs intimately and inseparably hinged to the limits of my own experience and understanding. This is the human condition, a perpetual struggle to maximize one's lot in life while minimizing the attending struggle.

The human condition is always such that the individual may only represent himself and his perception, which he or she has come to conveniently accept as his or her own useful reality.

To assume that such a reality is ubiquitous is to undermine the possibility of alternative dimensions of thought, belief, experience and perception, which is a claim against the value of the most atomic and fundamental aspect of the individual, and incidentally that which humanity perceives as community, civilization, or society.

Nothing should or shouldn't be. These words disguise a more sophisticated collection of underlying dynamics which often systematically collaborate to effect the consequences or results which escape the individual who is admittedly unable to capture, translate, reconcile or rationalize the phenomenon in his or her own limited sphere of comprehension.

In the end, the reader might benefit from a more thorough examination of the word should before or after sensing the intuitive demand to employ its utility in conversation. In these cases, consider the context and ask why or why not it should be that way. This will aid in the reader's understanding of world dynamics and precisely why the word is a mere disguise for limited human understanding or the dispirited pursuit of it.



The Subjectivity of Should


All human behavior and thought is rational. It is and can be nothing more or less. One's relative inability to understand one's experience or position is not sufficient cause to undermine or discredit this natural dynamic.

In the end, we may agree or disagree; however, this alone fails to justify any claim on the extent to which a case should or shouldn't be. These are merely opinions in a world saturated by them.

No answers can be absolutely known. Truth is only that which man is willing to accept, and then willing to perpetuate, the latter continuing into that which becomes tradition or axiom-laden theoretical dispositions tested only occasionally by a minor segment of the population bearing once more only an alternative set of built-in assumptions, effectively tilting the conversation toward a fresher zeitgeist, but hardly anywhere nearer to universal truth.

This author's guiding principle happens to be that of freedom.

Of course, all discourse may be immediately obstructed by this axiomatic distinction, as this world is full of all types who may make claims against the value of freedom. Are they wrong? No. Are they right? No. They just are. Just as nothing should or shouldn't be, right and wrong are human conventions which dilute the otherwise clearer and purer understanding of human action.

Opinions increasingly populate this planet only to eventually become concrete "evidence" or "tradition" against which all progressive understanding must then operate. This will not only aid in one's ability to understand and empathize with others, but also with one's own self.

And this not only convolutes the meaning of truth, but it makes it far more difficult to find in the tumultuous storm of emerging social inertia which displaces the value of truth in favor of the convenient platitudes and various forms of sophistry which have served those who continue to stock the shelves of intellectual fan fiction.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Death by Socialism

This title is available for purchase on Amazon ,  Lulu ,  Barnes & Noble , and Walmart .

Rally for Route 66!

Keep up the fight for the Mother Road! Rally for Route 66! There is a lot at stake in preserving this irreplaceable monument to American history, not merely as a tourist attraction but as a means to permitting a glimpse into our past, as a means to virtual time-travel into a time and space otherwise inaccessible, as a means to capturing the imaginations of future generations and to preserving the memory of our forbears in both form and spirit.  We are nothing without reverence for our forbears, without our heritage or our identity as a people, without the preserved memory of our history. Without these reminders, without the tangible connections to our past and the efforts which have forged our path and come to define us, without these monuments to the pioneering and the innovative, we are destined to forget all of that which makes us uniquely human, all of that which has afforded us so much insight and abundance, all of that which has given us pause to reflect and remember and to a...

Failure by Design

In the case for liberty, there is certainly some tolerance for error or failure, as it is generally suffered by the individual and not brought upon anyone by design . Wherever anyone seeks to empower government, however, one must be reasonably certain of the designs, the logic and the costs, and he must be equally honest about the unknowns as with the foreseeable consequences; after all, there is no margin for error where those designs are administered by the barrel of a gun.  One must necessarily remember that government is a monopoly on force and coercion, that force and coercion serve together as the modifying distinction between government and enterprise. It is a kind of force and coercion not by spirit or intention of written law but in accordance with the letter and understanding of the enforcers in their own time, in their own limited judgment and impaired conscience. As opposed to a state of liberty, where mistakes, failures and crimes are unavoidable in the face of human f...