 |
(Illustrative only)
The mirror theory is one
in which knowledge is created
by reflecting back another
way of viewing self. For
both people and systems
(systems being made of people
and decisions) it
is possible to create more awareness
through seeing the lens
in which behavior is experienced
by others. As example,
an official may make a decision
that is reflective of their reality
but might be immoral and
illegal when broken down into
its elemental parts. Thus,
hate and corruption are
distortions of lens.
Reflecting back a different perspective
helps create a more accurate
consciousness. In this
case the mirror could create
moral conscious (the act of systems
becoming more or less moral through
self interested implicit learning.)
Failure to learn leads to wider
vibrations as the gap between lens
and collective conscious diverge.
The long tail impact outside
of process and can't be managed
as it is rooted in human
and societal development itself.
Bringing back to a true north
based in shared universal values
creates system homeostasis
where social and economic growth
are sparked into synergistic development.
In theory a pre metric of Renaissance
when elements align or decline
when they move in or out of alignment.
Who says philosophy is useless? 👆🖕
Somewhat similar philosophical
topic Self-Conscious |
It is vitally important to continually improve and strengthen justice in our society; suspect in any society. This is not a liberal or conservative issue—justice is a fundamental pillar of healthy communities and belongs to no party but squarely is within the rights and domains of the people (remember parties should serve people in general and not just specific people.).
Justice is so important that it creates at least one pillar of a three pillar system (...one might argue there is a foundation based on which all pillars find anchor. The founding framers were smart people. Let us discuss that idea in the future.). Philosophy can help answer many questions and reflect back through a more accurate mirror.
Where justice and trust are strong, we typically see greater social engagement, healthier relationships, more economic activity, lower crime, and an overall sense of shared purpose. Where justice is weak, we often see the opposite. Research consistently shows that corruption, hate, and dishonest practices slow economic development and deepen social division.
....but who cares about philosophical dribble right? 🤷
The Learning Story:
In the hypothetical philosophical exercise known as the Story of the Clan, justice was distorted by groups of actors whose motives and behaviors undermined basic civil rights. Individuals pursued personal grievances, filed false complaints, leveraged insider networks, some officials engaged in extreme partisanship, and manipulated processes for personal benefit. Kids, adults, intellectuals, vulnerable, veterans, etc. were dehumanized, all the red lights ignored. These dark-triad-like behaviors eroded fairness and violated the core principles of constitutional protections and shared responsibility. When legal gamesmanship and retaliation replaces integrity, the issue becomes a clear matter of foundational values-moral conscious.
...when false perceptions impact outcomes are those places that are ripe for increased checks-n-balances? For helpful and wise reform?🤔Maybe not....
Perceptions:
Our initial perceptions of others often shape decisions in subtle but powerful ways, introducing bias that can ripple through an entire system. Those who act with bias are frequently the last to recognize their own contributions to injustice. This is why strong checks and balances are essential. The story prompts us to consider what happens when trust collapses—or when failures to correct wrongdoing are intentional—and how that affects the quality and legitimacy of decisions being made.
Much of life relies on impression, context, and the ability to interpret the most logical possibilities. Presenting distorted views, withholding key information, or misusing resources typically signals harmful intent. Good people understand the importance of fair systems and work to strengthen them wherever possible.
Continuous Striving:
As strong as our institutions may seem, there is always room for improvement. From a philosophical perspective is it possible to say that those who support institutional development encourage feedback (mirror of what it looks like reflected back) and constructive development? Would that be different then those who either neglect change, can't correct when wrong is done, or who criticize blindly without substance? If its not constructive then it is just an expression of feelings based on inner perceptions. Just something for you to think about (We can spot check our own mirrors through learning broadly, ideological fluidity related to cognitive flexibility, listening to stakeholders, using evidence and critical thinking peppered with science, ethics and over the horizonthinking. ...sounds about right. 🧐🪞🫣😬).
While the study referenced below addresses a different topic, it illustrates an important idea: perception shapes understanding, and new information can transform it. But when certain individuals begin from a position of negative perception—even when they are good, loyal, or model citizens—they face a much higher barrier to fairness. This reality underscores how much room remains for improvement and continued reflection. or maybe not? 🤔In philosophical questions there is no right or wrong only insightful and uninsightful perspectives. Time will answer all questions....
Trust, distrust, and testimonial injustice
*This is a hypothetical, philosophical, theoretical, learning thought experiment for discussion. Take with a grain of salt and feel free to discard.
