( Gavin
Ritz 2010.12.11.9.20NZT)
[Martin Taylor 2010.12.10.10.10]
(Gavin Ritz 2010.12.10.16.43NZ)
[Martin Taylor 2010.12.09.21.57]
This is probably about the appropriate time to go back to this issue of trust.
I give myself the liberty to say that all
of civilization and human interaction is a Social Affair.
And at the heart of this social affair is
a simple principle of trust. When a theory or model comes along and says it’s
is the “potential arbitrator of knowing” (how our mind works) in
this very personal space of our social affair it is requisitely required to be torn
to pieces and its heart made bare for the very purposes of trust and moral
obligation.
I have seen labeling (in its nastiness
form), injurious responses, blaming (all those who come here to fight us). Pinpricking
and all the selections that reduce trust.
So what is the moral trust inducing purpose
of PCT and its proponents? Where are the meanings, selections of the Controlled
Variable “Trust”? in PCT.
To say PCT boils down to a cold scientific
model only is at first glance, dangerous to itself (what about the Principle
level in HPCT) and secondly potentially dangerous and potentially injury (requiring
jury rather- {from Dicast Jury}) forming to society.
Regards
Gavin