Authored by William Robert Barber
Once introduced and accepted as truthful, the empathetic outreaches of the inductive thought process tend to mindfully bloom, embed, and remain; these ‘truths’ are rarely recanted. The indoctrinated, if queried for an opinion readily transforms into a fevered evangelist exclaiming the embed beliefs as unimpeachably truthful. Convinced of the righteousness of their belief they consider the contextual of the embedded as unquestionably substantive and factual; but in reality instead of truth, with few exceptions, these beliefs are suppositions founded on predeterminations void of empirical evidence. As with our religious preference, our acceptance of certain behavioral norms, adherence to societal and cultural taboos, and the willful compliance to what is considered sacred or prohibited, the inductive process has embedded itself upon the formative foundation of the believer.
The reason for such emphatic conclusiveness by a believer is principally because of the hard drive wiring that manages all of the embedded cognitive software applications. This software shuts down the scanning for new information that could alter a perspective; instead, the software only gathers information that supports the original inductive thought.
It is the displacement of deductive analysis by inductive acceptance that has altered the logic of evidentiary reasoning. It is the alteration of what was once considered the process of pragmatic thinking that has dulled the genetic instinctual of intellectual survival. Instead of facts resulting from deductive analysis political truths (for the many) are created by fixed understandings; encoded as inexorable truths. Often a predetermination, regardless of explicit evidence to the contrary undermines the formative; nevertheless, the original belief is never challenged.
Political parties discourage independent thinking (just ask the senator from Texas) the designated political monarch acting as the supreme know-most-if-not-all writes and disseminates the political talking points. Calculating time and space so to affect the most influence the media and their pundits’ stroke and bolster the ideological interpretive that suit their political perspective. For these professional disseminators of information it matters least that as a substitute for truthfulness are voluminous expressions of contrarian conceits vacuous of empirical verification. What does matter is an acceptance of the information not necessarily by the majority but by the ones with the loudest most prominent influence.
The elected take a differing route than the common as to beliefs closely held; when summoned to answer or declare politicians prevaricates until the sunsets.