by Joel Davis I have been thinking about testimonialism a lot and I have come to

by Joel Davis

I have been thinking about testimonialism a lot and I have come to the conclusion that testimonialism is less about “the truth” than it is about humility (and if it isn’t, it should be).

Testimony functions by subdividing experiential contexts into conceptual components via the commensurable definition of relative variance, and/or uniting conceptual components into experiential contexts via the commensurable definition of relative convergence, to enable and expand (in the case of testimony) the commensurable conceptualization of experiential contexts between communicators.

Non-testimony functions by misrepresenting a concept as a component of an experiential context it did not derive from by either:

– Defining the relative variance/convergence between concepts incommensurably. (Operational non-correspondence)

or

– Expanding the definition of the experiential context beyond commensurable relativity between its components. (Operational incoherence)

I can break this down into normiespeak..

Rather than telling me “what is”, tell me how it seems, because no matter “what is”, you can only ever perceive how it seems, as to find out that what it really “is” is different to how it seems, seems really only for it to now seem different.

Therefore to believe that how it seems is how it is, seems rather arrogant to me.