Ah! Thank you for the clarification and yes, Popper said it better. I’m still working on my own “where I stand” and as the whole field of philosophy is new to me (just started studying in the past year, probably less), I’m no where near yet.
I’m in the process of discovering “close fits” then attempting to find something to reject. I keep the good of course, but it’s a sign that I need to “keep moving forward”. I don’t believe there’s too many ideas that are _genuinely_ novel, so it’s just a matter of doing some philisophical forensics as it were.
Cognitively, the inhibition (or rejection or negative spike) happens before acceptance or rejection (and whatever else happens) – so dong the “No’s” first-and-why-they-are-nos” seems to be a natural step to me.
[responsivevoice_button voice="US English Male"]I’m in the process of discovering “close fits” then attempting to find something to reject. I keep the good of course, but it’s a sign that I need to “keep moving forward”. I don’t believe there’s too many ideas that are _genuinely_ novel, so it’s just a matter of doing some philisophical forensics as it were.
Cognitively, the inhibition (or rejection or negative spike) happens before acceptance or rejection (and whatever else happens) – so dong the “No’s” first-and-why-they-are-nos” seems to be a natural step to me.