Are you familiar with Jury Nullification?
It seems to be, that most court cases are won/lost during the 'Jury Selection' process. The Jury is supposed to be 'unbiased' 'neutral' etc, however that is pretty much impossible to accomplish. So it is, that the case can be won/lost during selection of BIASED Jurors who pretend to be non-biased.
Jury nullification is the most powerful weapon of 'the people' and one of the most hidden(obfuscated) things there is in the realm of 'Law'. One could simply ignore all facts, bias, opinion, etc, and just claim "This Law/Statute is Bullshit, not guilty"...
Just thought I'd throw that out there. I may do a post on nullification.
Two things your comment reminds me of:
1.) Yes, we have known for quite a long time that there is no such thing as unprejudiced people. ... in the interesting and less popular areas of psychology, people have refrained from recommending a mediator who would be "unbiased" to disputing parties, but have made this particular mediation a discipline that sails with the wind and not against it. The mediator never speaks of himself or herself as "objective" and "impartial" or "neutral"; on the contrary, the mediator admits that he will listen very subjectively and sympathetically to each party, take the statements in perspective, and do so in exactly the same way for the other party. Systemic mediation - a term by which this form is known - says of itself "I am all-party".
2.) A mother observes her two children arguing over a piece of bread. She silently goes to them, takes the bread, divides it into two pieces and hands these two pieces to the older child.
A so-called western, modern parent would not leave it to one of the children to distribute the bread fairly, one would hand out one piece to each of the children oneself, thus wasting a good chance to let the children cope with the rest of the task in a self-efficient way.
Well, isn't "teaching wisdom" technically "protection from folly"?
hmm ... actually ... no. Wisdom is not something I learn from being protected from a folly but from having the chance to practice my mistakes. Once I practice, I gain in experience - when things go wrong, I've learned, when things go right, I've learned, too.
I don't think that wisdom can be taught, but it can develop the more experienced one becomes in risking mistakes :)
Every beginner is a fool.
Perhaps small follies (with proper guidance) can teach you to avoid larger follies?
Yes, why not? I learn from my follies, so it's the folly which teaches.
But then ... a folly is a folly, I cannot think in terms of small or large, at least, I would need an example. Do you have one for me?
Memory of a childhood panic about an unexpected change might help you prepare for more significant unexpected changes later in life.
I'm suggesting that it's possible to help others see the connections between seemingly unrelated feelings and events, perhaps mitigating some of the anxiety associated with the learning process.
Very much so. Great quote.
This is my favorite commentary on the subject.
Yes. He describes exactly why I said:
He has some good advise about the judge too, but you kind of want to 'play that by ear' when the time comes. As in, counter obfuscate..
It's basically fully functional ANARCHY.