Our Platform for Outlining Colorado’s Future

Abstract  I propose that we build the SQL code that would facilitate an online forum. This forum would use a relational database to track reasons to agree and disagree with conclusions. It would also allow you to submit a belief as a reason to support another belief (see image 1 below):  Figure 1: Arguments used to support other arguments Arguments are currently made on websites, in books, and even in videos and songs. It would be powerful to outline all the arguments that agree or disagree with a conclusion and put them on the same page as seen below: Figure 2: Arguments go from websites, books, songs, videos, into a relational database and are presented with their structure Having the structure of how all these arguments are used to support each other, could allow us to automatically strengthen or weaken a conclusion's score based on the score of their assumptions. The purpose of the Idea Stock Exchange is to find ways to give conclusions scores based on the quality and quan...

Reasons to agree : It would help us move towards understanding if web forum designers rewarded those who can demonstrate that they understand those with whom they disagree with.  There are many ways discussion forum designers can reward those who demonstrate that they understand those whom they disagree with. Web-designers could test users ability to properly identify similar concepts, from multiple choice options. Perhaps people who have their comments evaluated could have special consideration in evaluating weather or not the person who disagreed got their statement right.  Maybe before you disagree with someone you have to put into your own words exactly which part you disagreed with. You could do this by highlighting or bolding the part that you disagree with.  Web designers would help online debate if they created web forums that allowed users to identify specifically which portions of text they agree and disagree with.  Not identifying exa...

It's essential to restructure online debates to ensure that reasons supporting and opposing a belief coexist on the same platform. True understanding and resolution in any debate come not from overlooking the counterarguments but from directly engaging with them. Ignoring an opponent's perspectives and data is akin to navigating a debate with blinders on. It limits the depth of the discussion and often leads to an echo chamber effect, where one's own beliefs are amplified without challenge, stunting intellectual growth and understanding.  Constructive debates require acknowledging and addressing the full spectrum of views, which is why having reasons to agree and disagree presented together is crucial. This approach fosters a more holistic and nuanced understanding of issues, allowing participants to weigh different viewpoints fairly and make more informed decisions. By structuring online debates in this way, we encourage not just the exchange of ideas but the cultivation o...

If our beliefs and arguments were entered into a relational databases, we could:  tag arguments as either a reason to agree or disagree with a particular belief. This would be beneficial because:  We could post the results so that reasons to agree or disagree with a conclusion would be on the same webpage. It would be beneficial to have all the reasons to agree and disagree with a belief on the same page.   assign scores to arguments assign scores to beliefs, based on the score of the arguments for and against the beliefs assign scores to beliefs, based on other beliefs that are used to support or oppose them. For instance the belief that the middle class should get a tax break, has many reasons to agree or disagree with it, and it can also be used as a reasons to support or oppose other beliefs, like the belief that we should support politicians who agree or disagree with a middle class tax cut.  tag them with intelligent meta data, to ...

Reasons or arguments people use to agree : Evidence-free metaphysical speculations or politicized wish-fulfillment fantasies will destroy us. We can't just adopt socialism because it makes us feel good, without first knowing that it will work, and that it won't put our good freedom loving nice guys at a disadvantage in competition with non freedom loving dictators.  Bertrand Russell was right when he said. "It is undesirable to believe a proposition when there is no ground whatsoever for supposing it is true." When you make an assumption you make an ass out of you and me.   If we don't use good logic to make our arguments, we will come to bad decisions.  If we want to survive as a species, we need to make good decisions.  Our beliefs affect our happiness If you want to enjoy your life, you should spend your time on rewarding activities.  Our beliefs affect our actions. Our beefs affect our personal success If believe it is important to not be...

Our conclusions have many reasons to agree and disagree with them and each of these beliefs has many reasons to agree and disagree with them. As these arguments branch out and arguments multiply, it becomes too much for our brains to handle all at once. Assumptions are beliefs that are used to support other beliefs. If you change one assumption, it will change the strength of each conclusion that builds on that assumption. In a relational database you can say 5 people live together, then when you change one person's address, it can change all of their addresses. In a similar way, if we strengthen or weaken any assumption in a relational database, it will strengthen or weaken all of the conclusions that are based on these assumptions. Defining all these relationships is the only way we can ever make any progress at weighing all the data that we have.   

Reasons or arguments people use to agree : Our beliefs should be backed by sound logic. Score: 9 A relational database outlining our beliefs can be built cost-effectively. Entering beliefs and arguments into databases allows us to leverage relational database features to reach better conclusions. If we can sequence millions of lines of human DNA, organizing our thoughts and beliefs should be achievable. Sequencing the human genome requires advanced scientific methods, but outlining beliefs only needs a database. Using a relational database to associate arguments with the beliefs they support enables the creation of a scoring system that evaluates the validity of people's arguments and the cumulative validity of their belief Other ways of saying the same thing: We should create a collaborative database for beliefs and their supporting arguments. A crowdsourced repository for beliefs and their justifications should be developed. The best Assumption that must also be accepted if we ac...

Reasons or arguments people use to agree : We need to back up our beliefs with good logic   Score: 9 We can build a relational database that outlines our beliefs relatively cheaply   If we entered our beliefs and arguments into databases, there are many features of relational databases  that could help us come to better conclusions.  If we can sequence millions of lines of Human DNA, you would think that we could organize our thoughts and beliefs.  You need advanced scientific methods to sequence the human genome, but all you need is a database to outline the things people believe. If you use a relational database to associate arguments with the beliefs they support, you could design a scoring system  that analyze the validity people's arguments, and then the cumulative validity of their beliefs. 

Reasons or arguments people use to agree : Our beliefs are are all all tied together in nonlinear ways similar to a relationship database . 

I believe that tallying the number of laws that agree or disagree with a belief can serve as a measure of how strongly society deems something to be wrong. For example, every society considers murder to be wrong and typically addresses it through some form of criminal justice system. To quantify this, we can assign scores to conclusions based on the number of laws supporting a belief (e.g., murder is wrong) and the quality of arguments linking a law to that belief. Factors to consider could include the relationship score between the belief and the law, the severity of punishment for violating the law, and the relative number of laws that agree or disagree with the belief or any of its supporting arguments. This can be achieved by creating an equation and implementing it in software. A comprehensive algorithm could be designed to account for all these factors in the following manner: Law Score = Sum of scores for (Laws that agree - Laws that disagree) * Linkage Strength between law and ...

I believe that we can count the number of laws that agree or disagree with a belief, as a way of measuring how much  society believes something is wrong. For example every society believes that murder is wrong, and often punishes it with some sort of criminal justice program. A way of quantifying this so that you can give scores to conclusions based on the quantity of laws that are said to support a belief (like murder is bad) and the quality of arguments that a law supports a certain belief about a behavior being bad, the relationship score between the belief and the law, the severity of punishment for breaking the law, and the relative number of laws that can be said to agree or disagree with the belief, or any of the supporting arguments, would be to make an equation and build it in software. A way of counting all of this with a powerful algorithm could be expressed this way: Or we could represent the math more simply by substituting algebra, with the following de...