
Originally Posted by
Esper
We seem to think along the same line. I understand your viewpoint in what could be. It is entirely possible that it could. That is why the Tech industry evolves so rapidly. They don't ask what is, they ask what can be. Not everything works, but such is the nature of prototypes. They are not perfected versions of what is. Myself, I always view my mind as a prototype. I do ask myself what can be, but for the sake of improvements that lead to what can be I don't let myself be bogged down by theories unless they are of viable use. However I do acknowledge they exist and can be viable with methods that are haven't been birthed yet. My ultimate goal in any line of thought is to perfect it, but I am not afraid to break a few parts in doing so. Parts are expendable, theory is not, because it leads to innovations. We cannot however forsake the means and hope for a good end. My end truly is understanding. My means dissecting systems both as individual parts and as a whole. Your scenarios and thoughts are interesting to me, because your abstract perspective is different from mine, which desires both abstract theory and practical application.
We need dreamers, but we also need a system for the dreamers to use. People are and have always been the problem. Many are flawed. Many don't seek improvement. This is why teams are important. Personally I find you refreshing. Our disconnect however seems to be terms. I do work under assumptions with you because I view you as an equal. Was this mistake? I do hope it was not.