4/26 Making HR operations more efficient for one person with ChatGPT WEB Seminar

the lure of dualism

We live in an age of clarity.
  • If it's going to be searched on the Internet, we should have words that searchers can understand.
  • We should simplify and bring the conclusion first.
  • Let's illustrate.

Such as.

It must be easy to understand.

There is a growing desire for simplicity, even if it is not in itself a place to be criticized.
The temptation to dualism is particularly strong.

Justice or evil, white or black.

Clear conclusions and story interpretations are required.
However, we must not forget that there are realities that cannot be fully explained with definite answers.

*Flying clarity.


Is clarity everything?

Is it all about clarity?

As in science, the elements are taken out and the principles are simply explained.
Cause and effect exist.
The causal relationship is clear.

In many cases, we see people talking with the idea that these things are always present.

But even in science, where we talk in simplistic terms, there are complex systems.
He said that although each individual movement can be explained, when several are gathered together, they behave differently and are difficult to predict.

The Objectivist Nature Center is still getting nowhere.
The idea is that if all variables are known, the future can be predicted.

Also, justice and evil are often clear in movies.
The villains will push the evil forward firmly.

But in the real world, this would not be the case.
From one standpoint, it might be described as "evil," but sometimes there is a reason.
The person may have parents, family members or pets.
It may not be a villain for them, either.

There is a desire to simplify and dualize, but this may not lead to an accurate view of reality.

Service Menu
interpoint (interword separation)Individual Consulting
interpoint (interword separation)Email Consulting
interpoint (interword separation)Requests to Write
interpoint (interword separation)request for an interview
interpoint (interword separation)Request for Lecture
interpoint (interword separation)Profile of Akihiro Kojima
interpoint (interword separation)Free mailing of Akihiro Kojima's Self Magazine
interpoint (interword separation)Tenmusubi Certified Public Tax Accountant Office Web site
interpoint (interword separation)4/26(Wed.) Shorten your hiring time with ChatGPT! Webinar on streamlining HR operations for one-person HR
interpoint (interword separation)5/26(Fri.) Even Names Make an Impression! Company Naming Workshop


phenomenological fuzziness

Phenomenology's expression is also strongly ambiguous in this way.
The expression is used to scratch a lot of the surface of events.

What one perceives is itself a state of external cut-outs.
It is like grabbing in front of such an artificial state, grabbing not the background of what appears, but the appearance itself.

I don't see any sense of cause and effect here.

Decisions from the incomprehensible

The causal relationship is clear.
So it is easy to say, choose A out of A and B.

But I can't figure out the cause-and-effect relationship in a firmer way.
It appears to be a complex system.
Causation itself may be a mistake.

Which is more often the case in your life?
In raws, where fields and approaches are not limited, the latter may be more in line with the actual situation.

It is easier to come to a conclusion if it is reduced to a binary argument.
But they don't often allow it.

The temptation to dualism is tempting.

What is the cause?" I want to find out.
Who is to blame? and, "Who is responsible?" and.

Of course, there will be those situations, but sometimes in life we don't know the answer to that question.
While it is tempting, we believe that it is also meaningful to take a different approach, to view it as a phenomenon and make a judgment.

I was wondering if you could try this in difficult problems where the causal relationship is not clear.