Redefining Google: A Proposal

Let's broaden the use of PageRank beyond just ranking web pages. Here's how we could redefine the Google experience:

1. Apply PageRank to rank conclusions, using the strength of supporting and opposing evidence (pros and cons) as determinants.
2. Rank evidence based on the presence of corroborating or contradicting evidence. When an argument is weakened, it should have a trickle-down effect, weakening all conclusions that are built upon it.
3. Organize the world's data in a way that favors well-structured arguments. A good argument can be defined as one that is true, relevant, and important.
   • An argument can be deemed 'true' if it is logically sound (valid), supported by evidence (observations), and has been replicated.
   • The quality of this evidence and replication can be evaluated based on the number of participants, the degree of blindness in the study (blind, double-blind, etc.), and the number of independent replications.
4. Instead of directing users to potentially biased sites, Google should take the initiative in organizing the world's data. Offering a balanced view of pros and cons is far superior to exposing users to potential misinformation.
5. Google should prioritize data ranking based on reason and verifiable evidence rather than popularity or clout.
6. Lastly, Google should allow users to vote on the strengths and weaknesses of arguments. These should include considerations for logical coherence, the level of verification or replication, the relevance to the conclusion, and the importance (likelihood and impact of cost or benefits). The highest scoring arguments should be displayed at the top of their respective columns.

By implementing these changes, Google could become an even more valuable and trusted resource for users seeking balanced, unbiased answers. This could result in increased user engagement and potentially drive substantial revenue, as people continue to seek reliable information in an increasingly complex digital world.