P-Law and the Veritasium Electricity Debate. Just a note that this author in thi

P-Law and the Veritasium Electricity Debate.
Just a note that this author in this video: https://t.co/MTa3Kf8Al1 … uses the P-Law method of operationalization and serialization to illustrate disambiguation by use of the: [Electricity] Antenna > Capacitor > Wire sequence. Meaning the answer is “in every way possible” – which is the answer to pretty much every question in each generation of the hierarchy of sciences. (Especially neuroscience.)

So the confusion IMO was created by the typical means by which all pseudo-conundrums are created in philosophy (sophistry) and academy (pseudoscience(: by asking for a single solution instead of the spectrum of solutions to the problem.

And thereby not solving the principle cognitive problem plaguing modern thought: one-ness, ideal types, ideals, instead of equilibria producing stable relations.

This is, as I often criticize, the problem of framing a question as a means of suggestion that produces ignorance and error as a consequence. When instead we should habituate students, and citizens, into serialization of possible solutions until they have at least the “three points necessary to test a line”, not just in geometry but in everything we do.

This also explains how education seeking right answers instead of a sequence or spectrum of answers produces ignorance in modernity, despite it’s utility in the 3R’s under the simple cognitive load of agrarianism.