CLPEX Chat Board

A few days ago I read a post where the poster was concerned about the disagreement in expert’s views of different things. That caused me to stop and ponder as I had been thinking of them as discussions not as disagreements. On some occasions flaming discussions but discussions none the less. One of the problems with internet forums is you cannot see the subtle tones, facial expressions, etc. that generally accompany communication between people. These can be very important clues in communication. When reading a good book the author tries to describe the mood and interaction but most forum users do not write like authors. When people talk about issues a lot of what they are saying or thinking is based upon or comes from their different belief systems. I think the purpose of discussion is to exchange ideas and thoughts of our different beliefs.

I wanted to share with the readers of this forum something that was told to me about beliefs a number of years ago by a Behavioral Psychologist. Some things I have added to it over the years. Some things I am sure I have forgotten.

Imagine a smooth pond and you throw a rock into it. You will see a series of ripples stretching out from the center. Those rings in the center are the core beliefs of a person. They make up that persons essence and their very being. The next series of rings are the person’s inner beliefs. These are developed from knowledge and experience. Mostly experience. Someone can read something but to experience it solidifies the belief. The middle rings or median beliefs are next and come from the person’s knowledge. The outer rings or outer beliefs are thoughts or ideas that come from others or develop on their own. Some of these are developed through reasoning.

The core beliefs are very strong and very difficult to change or alter. After all they make up a lot of what that person is. The inner beliefs are also strong but not like the core. It takes a lot to change the inner beliefs. The median beliefs are somewhat easier to change for some people. The easiest to change is the outer beliefs if the conditions are right. To change a person’s beliefs one cannot do it by attacking the core but starting with the outer layers and adding to those ideas, and then knowledge, and lastly experience (if possible).

For a person to alter their beliefs or modified by someone else they must have a model or procedure for introspection or challenge of their beliefs. Without a method of introspection or challenge, beliefs will not change either from the outside or from the inside.

For one person may believe they are working to build a better vocabulary while another believes they are simply playing with the words.

For one person may believe they are working to build a better model while another believes they are simply arguing the concept.

For one person may believe they are striving for a better concept or ideas while another believes they are merely spouting philosophical waste.
The above are not examples of discussion but examples of beliefs without any structure of introspection.

We may not agree with someone else’s view of the world and how it works but we do owe that person the right to state their beliefs and if possible rebut those outer beliefs with reasoning and dignity when they do not coincide with ours. We owe them that right because after all we are human beings.

As LPE I think that a lot of our Core and Inner Beliefs are very much the same. It is the outer beliefs that come from thought or ideas or even some from the middle circles are the ones that bring out the most discussion, or as some may believe dissension.

It is not wrong to have discussions. It is wrong not to consider them.

I still believe in discussions and not dissensions.

Well said.

As an aside from the direction of this thread (which I quite enjoyed) I was recently reading the transcripts of a USA court case from the IAI conference where the fingerprint examiner was responding to the issue of absolute findings. The response given was phrased in a manner which questioned what 'beliefs' we were dealing with in presenting fingerprint identification evidence. The position of 'Im a 100% sure' is based on the examiner stating their experience and personal conviction tells them to support that finding. There is a strong subjective element to this decision. The position of '100% right' means there is a factual basis for that confidence and the evidence would stand scrutiny from peer review. There would still be a subjective element in deciding when MPR (moment of positive recognition) was reached but also an equally strong objective component that both recorded the methodology and accurately applied the technique. Maybe we understand the two terms better when used in conjunction, that we are 'sure we are right'. Coming back to the original thread about 'beliefs' I would consider a survey of fingerprint examiner personality types to be a meaningful statistic of how we receive and look for information/knowledge and form our views. The Keirsey Temperament test is one way of collecting that data. ISTJ

Personally, I believe a good post should use as few words as possible to make one's point. For me concision is King. As such, I think people should remain open minded and rationally detached if they begin feel jilted by someone's perceived curt disagreement. We must have the right to say that we agree or disagree, and list the reasons, without writing a novel.