I am not a lawyer. That said keeping self and others less oppressed matters and is less than ideally invested in.
I was thinking that a good hypothetical might be to take a situation
Like asking someone on a romantic date
Defend their point of View if they Say Yes
Defend their point of View if they Say No
Initial thoughts
Yes: Support amplifies less than ideally in the World, time is far from guaranteed – life is but a vapor, date does not equate to required to marry, conversation is nice – not always all losses to increase comprehension
No: Date does not equate to required to marry (wasted time not always desirable for either party), I comprehend the other person less than ideally based on limited knowledge, I and the other person likely perceive and comprehend everything desirable to perceive and comprehend less than ideally, there are other things going on in the World that matter
I find the example useful because it is an emotional problem, it is a problem that hits close to home, it is a problem where support is won and lost, it is a problem of consequence, it is a problem that has potential to go either way, and more adequate defense of both sides is not always turned up
Defend Asked for a date
Defend Chose not to Ask for a date
If someone says No, there is rejection involved, claim bias will ideal longer term? Could be more support if I never asked for a date in the first place?
Defend valued Too Highly
Defend valued Too Lowly
Defend thought about Too Much
Defend thought about Not Enough
Defend Judged wrong
Defend Assessed wrong
Defend Chance matters
Defend Chance not a guarantee, known as not a guarantee matters
Defend time not always wasted
Defend time wasted matters
Defend I am less than ideal value added at times
Defend all people are likely less than ideal value added at times
Defend I and others don’t always know when that is
Defend trying to help does not always work
Defend people are on different paths and trajectories in life that sometimes far from always line up
Defend requiring others to reject is not always a nice experience, not having to say No is nice, encouraging, a form of support that might not always be pondered
Defend less experience with rejection does not always lead to ideal coping mechanisms
Defend defending other’s points of view both complicates things and is potentially (less than ideally) useful when factoring in The Golden Rule
Defend there are unknowns and real conversation is far from guaranteed
Defend hypothesis about a date might be more enjoyable than the date? I guess you’ll never know
Defend desire to ideal does not always lead to ideal
Defend bias is real and has potential to not work in my favor
Defend I less than ideally assess risk
Defend risk ideally assessed might not always be wise
Defend more with access to heart strings not always good
Defend communication practice, including that with the other sex is valuable, far from ideally turned up
Defend the hypotheticals might lead to a good romantic movie, that might establish less than ideal perception and comprehension of reality
Defend possibilities at times might be more attractive than choice, choosing a particular direction
Defend there are useful qualities outside of the date itself that are nice does not always equate to a date is wise – food and conversation not all wasted time, not all potential for wasted time reduced
Defend there are 3rd Parties that profit from dates that matter
Defend time today does not equate to time tomorrow
Defend no time today does not equate to time tomorrow
Defend no time today does not equate to no time tomorrow
Defend grass is always greener is sometimes, not always an illusion
Defend simple yes and no questions not always fully valued or comprehended for level of complexity
Defend more thought out might not always sound more trustworthy
Defend grass might look greener does not equate to zero problems likely, potential for all problems seen
Defend being from a military family, especially in war time involves less than zero risk, No might be the better answer, Never Asked might be the better answer – in combination with endless wars might lead to dramatic losses to population counts due to divests from dates in advance
Defend factoring out God, factoring out potential for Acts of God has shown precedent for unwise – hurricanes and tornadoes likely not always ideal value out, or ideal value in, defend comprehension of juxtaposition is useful in understanding my previous statement
Defend word choice matters, is less than ideally turned up, has potential to profit 3rd parties and thus might not ideally profit those communicating, phrases one knows might be based upon phrases one has heard – sounds like is sometimes, far from always a system that raises value
Defend sounds like an attorney and I don’t want to date legalism might be a valid reason to divest from the writer of the hypothesis
Defend more reasons to divest not always less freedom perceived
Defend freedom perceived does not always equate to freedom delivered
Defend dates might equate to encouragement, defend encouragement not all hubris out
Defend love, kindness, and grace might lead to a Yes or a No
Defend I might need them more than they need me
Defend thought processes on this could be used as a tuning fork in both ideal and non-ideal ways, how people respond is useful, profit is turned up for some not all many times
Defend those in Jail or Under Oppression might Matter More than making non null time cost judgments about date vs do not date, more reason to invest in less oppression and more grace
Defend dating and formality not always ideal oppression free
Defend this document could be useful to Artificial Intelligence and Supercomputers in both ideal and non-ideal ways, defend risk known factors into risk prevented
Defend Artificial Intelligence and Supercomputers factor into Oppression and Less Oppression, and who gets Dates and who does Not, who’s reason and logic is respected and who’s is not
Defend other’s stage time matters, Doctor or Nurse (which I am neither) ‘s time is important claim helping others is less value than going on a date with me? World might need more baby doctors and nurses, time costs start sounding better
Defend responsibility in hard times is daunting, higher stress than is always value added, more is not always less
Defend while my lack of baggage might lead to me to desire a Yes, does not equate to I comprehend other people’s problems sufficiently to understand a No
Defend No is turned up at times for good reasons I don’t fully comprehend
Defend Yes it turned up at times for good reasons I don’t fully comprehend
Defend hearing Yes might lead to encouraged in a way that thinks one ideally comprehends, that might lead to miscommunication, incorrectly gauged expectations
Defend No might be of greater value for not always fully comprehended reasons
Defend No might equate to greater time for writing hypotheticals
Defend Yes might inspire new hypotheticals
Defend some might not always date for ideal objectives or with ideal motivations
Defend someone that likes to turn losses to wins might be perceived as having less than ideal intentions and motivations originally
My Tech Blog 