From: ma_blase@csd.uwe.ac.uk (Fox)
Newsgroups: alt.angst
Subject: Proof
Date: 10 Jan 93 18:56:35 GMT
Organization: University of the West of England, Bristol
X-Newsreader: Tin 1.1 PL5

The one thing I find hardest to obtain is proof.  Information is
present in abundance but when it comes to obtaining direct data
which ratifies a given set of information it's almost impossible
to be one hundred percent certain that you are being presented with
a representation of actuality.

An interesting concept if you followed it.  It's almost impossible to 
disprove it too.  Suppose someone tells you something.  You now have that
information present but you do not know if the thing you were told was
the absolute truth or a misrepresentation by that person in order to
throw your perception of a given set of items or events.  The only way
to check up on such a fact is by relating it to other facts you have
already checked up on and are reasonably sure about their validity.
But if the supplier is intent upon your misinformation then surely they
would have thought of that already and countered your efforts by attempting
to supply you with information which would only make you check along certain 
paths and which would, of course, lead to a ratification of the information
thus supplied?  Of course, you can't go through life like that or else you
do not trust anything anyone says.  Or can you?

Ok, you may say that this just sounds like paranoia linked in with a complex
game of double guessing but the most powerful tool at a person's disposal
when it comes to severely hurting another is the supply of information. It
seems most unlikely that any person reading this group has not at some time
been very hurt as a result of the transfer of facts from one person to
another, either directly or indirectly.  The importance of the above paragraphs
is evident if they a borne in mind when supplying information about yourself.
If people do not have the facts they cannot use them against you.  
Alternatively, if you use the above to tailor your own responses to people's
questions in order to control the amount of direct information you give out
then the risk is also minimised.

Personally I believe that there are two main ways of fooling all of the people
all of the time in this respect and neither of them involve lieing.  The first
method is to supply the barest facts when challenged or to provide the 
informatio requested with another set of facts which, while not related at
all may easily make the querier believe something else.  A very common 
tactic is to answer the question with another question, specially designed
to make it sound as if the answer is evident from the question when, in fact,
it could be totally unrelated.  How can you prove that someone is doing this?
You can't, you just have to get them to directly answer the question.

The second way is more subtle.  When someone asks you a question answer it.
Fully.  Leave nothing out.  Ever.  Human nature is such that if you provide
all the facts about yourself when asked the other person will almost always
assume you are hiding something, normally relating the amount you are hiding
with the relative 'importance' of that which is asked.  You don't need to
try to fool them, they fool themselves.  The proof of the information you 
supply to the person will be totally unavaiable to them due to the fact that
they fabricated a sizable chunck of the answer themelves.

But what has all this to do with what I said at the begining?  In both of
the above the problem for the person to whom the information is being given
is that they are responsible for fooling themselves.  Thus when they try to
locate a proof for that information they have recieved they will also have 
to try to prove themselves wrong, a situation whih most people attempt to
avoid most vigorously.  Switch the situation around and of course you find that
you have the same task when processing any information someone supplies to you.

Personally speaking I tend to discount almost all that people say and just
conentrate on what they do.  Actions do speak louder than words but you
need one hell of a good dictionary.

Fox
-- 
 |\_/| F 	'Merlin, are you a dream?'
 \O O/ O   	'A dream to some, A NIGHTMARE TO OTHERS!'
  \o/  X	       	 	         	    - Excalibur
Newsgroups: alt.angst