There is something important that I need to mention here, in terms of justice and truth. The truth is, you cannot technically disprove anything. You can only prove the facts as counter to what another person has claimed. For example, if I was to say that 2+2=5, what would you do to “disprove” this? Well, you might state that 1+1=2 and then, by substituting each 2 with that equivalent equation, you may rewrite the original equation as 1+1+1+1, and that equals 4. "So," you'd state, "2+2 equals 4."

But! What have you just done, no matter what method you actually used, specifically? You proved that 2+2=4. You didn’t TECHNICALLY disprove that 2+2=5. You simply proved something to else that seems to contradict it. Even if you didn't try to prove that 2+2=4. You did try to prove something that contradicts the possibility of 2+2 equaling 5. You had to use evidence, and proof, because there is no such thing, as "disproof” (Cox). 

In the case of proving that 2+2=4, if it wasn’t already established as a proven fact that the equation can only have one answer, then, technically speaking, what you’ve just done, hasn’t “disproven” anything, and of course, the fact that 2+2 can only have one valued answer, had to have already been proven, on its own. Like a lawyer proving a client's alibi to get him off his trial for murder. He can’t disprove his guilt as an option. You can only prove the limited possibility of that option as a whole by proving contradictions. In short, you cannot disprove guilt, but you can prove innocence. It's just more difficult. That, my friends, is why we have the rule of “innocent until proven guilty” because you should never be allowed to claim guilt without proof, as disproving it is a far more difficult task because while the prosecution must prove only one item, the defense must “disprove” several, to get the same job done. For each bit of evidence the prosecutor brings, the defense must find their own evidence to contradict it.

In cases with infinite answers, proving that 2+2 is equal to 4 wouldn’t technically disprove that 2+2=5, as disproving is really just a matter of multiple choice, and a dwindling down all the possible options, to one. That one choice left standing is what we consider "the truth", the truth. If the options are infinite, proving an alternative simply means proving something new, and that is one of the only ways to create real progress in the world. If you aim to do so, despite the pain it’ll inevitably cause you, I congratulate, appreciate, admire, and respect you, my friend.

In life, questions don’t have just one answer. Even the equation of 2+2 has many answers. That’s just the way things are. While understanding that these hypotheses, or stories, are many, and that you’ll never be certain of WHO someone is, or even the WHOs behind the Whats someone has, it’s important to accept that listening to those you disagree with, is often a far better option than trying to convert them. 

Let’s pretend you were a lab assistant. Let's make you the assistant to a famous, but stuck-up scientist. This scientist has just walked up to you, handed you an apple, and said “Compare this.” What happens next? You'll probably have to ask something along the lines of, “Compare it with what?” To which they'll respond “That’s not important. We’re going to ignore that. Don't use a second item. Just compare the apple and tell me which one tastes better. I'm sure you can do it." 

That sounds like quite the impossible task, now doesn’t it? It may even sound unfair. 

You create the environment for your own intellectual progress or destruction, and you can't be certain of your intellectual ranking without comparison. The biggest problem is that you can't know that your opinion is better than another person's if you don’t even know what their opinion is in the first place. Luckily, finding out whether your opinion is more suitable, better or not, takes a very simple process. Oftentimes, all you need to do, is listen.

In order to know that your conversion of another person's view is justified, you must know, beyond a reasonable doubt, as innocent until proven guilty, that you have the better option, like a robber being proven of having good money. You must prove that your point is better, through the use of the truth, the WHOLE truth, and nothing else but the truth.

How can you know the whole truth of another person’s perspective, if you haven’t listened to their whole perspective and the reasons behind it? If you’ve listened, and listened well, asking, and begging for more information, and you still find, beyond a reasonable doubt, a justifiable reason to covert them as a way to help them, then, and only then, should you aim for a conversion from point A to point B; from their stance to yours.

The essence of risk assessment, throughout your life, is not about always being right. Calculating a risk is about determining whether or not you have the strength and fortitude to face the consequences if you’re wrong. Simply assessing what risks exist isn’t enough. If you don’t know which risks are okay to take, then listing them all out will still lead you nowhere. Again, you don’t always need to be right. You just need to be able and willing to face the risk, of being wrong.

Because it's always a possibility.

And the risks that come with converting the wrong person could be catastrophic. What if their opinion is what would lead them to great success in the world, say, to solve world hunger, and you converted them to your lesser belief, simply because you didn’t bother to listen to what they had going for them? What if, by letting them convert you to their beliefs, you could have accomplished similar results, merely by following their advice? It sounds like quite the risk to take, letting such a fatal trap exist, and it's the ability to fall into this trap that makes arrogance and delusion so deadly to both individuals, and groups alike.

Listening can also lead to great insight into How things are connected, as well as to answer other questions you may not be able to solve on your own. It may even uncover questions you didn’t know you should be asking. Although it’s not always the case, I’d venture to guess that this is true, more often than not, for the simple fact that there are COUNTLESS answers to any given question. We’ve spoken before on this site about the idea of broken tea cups and whole pieces. If you’ve forgotten, since it was a long time ago, I recommend looking back on it. Once you’ve recalled the telling tale of tea cups (try saying that 10 times fast), I’d like to connect… an addition to it. Literally!

How many answers are there to the equation:

“2+2 = ”?

Here are the reminders for the infinite answers:

• 2 + 2 = 4
• 2 + 2 = 1+1+1+1

• 2 + 2 = 4 x 1

• 2 + 2 = 2 / 0.5

• 2 + 2 = 65,536^(1/8)

• 2 + 2 = (4!)^2/(4 x 3)^2

... You get the idea...

Even one of these categories can be extended indefinitely, continuously, forever. You may be saying, “Author… you had me go back and read about the tea cup… just for you to tell me about it all… AGAIN!?!?”  You’re close, but as I said, I’m making an addition here, and I hope to make it a memorable one. Not only are all of these answers acceptable, but they’re also EQUAL. No one answer is worth more than the others, literally or figuratively. Within a world of infinite solutions, there also lies infinite EQUAL answers for EVERY layer of the tea cup. There are infinite 1st place, best answers. There are infinite 2nd place, lesser answers, and so on. There may even be infinite rankings from 1st place to ∞th place, though infinity isn’t technically a number… you know what I mean! At the end of the day, there are A LOT of possibilities, and many of them are truly equal with each other.

It’s okay to disagree with others, so long as you understand that having a different answer doesn’t inherently make another person wrong. In times of disagreement, it’s best to look for an understanding, and attach conversion onto it from there only if necessary. If you LISTEN FIRST, and THEN find them to be wrong, as seen through the eyes of innocent until proven guilty, beyond a reasonable doubt, you may, justifiably, be allowed to attempt converting them towards your ideas or beliefs. Most people, when they say they disagree, they mean to say, “I disagree. Now let me tell you why you’re wrong.” Your job is to use a different, higher quality definition, and a wiser form of thinking, one that focuses on knowing HOW to think, rather than knowing WHAT to think. We're hoping to commit to the art of thinking here, in this book. When you say “I disagree.” it should ALWAYS mean, “I disagree. Now explain why you’re right.” This allows for you to maintain freedom of thought, as well as to free the thoughts of your companion, into open conversation, so that you may both think well, and united.

Disagreement is not a tool for conversion, and it shouldn’t be used as such. Disagreement is a position for our minds, not the movement, or progress of them. It’s stable, but rigid. Movement requires… flexibility. Wisdom is flexible and resilient. Intellect is… sturdy, but stubborn, and geniuses have the best of both worlds. Aim to be strong, and swift, and resilient, and you’ll have a mind to rival even the fates themselves. Have a mind that is sturdy, but brittle, and with only the slightest breeze of uncertainty, you’ll lose your wits and have no mind about you at all.

Also! Notice how all of the answers are equal to 2 + 2, but none of them are the same as 2 + 2.

 

I never wrote an equation that states this:

"2 + 2 = 2 + 2"

 

This is just another error in our language, which is very similar to the one with WHOs and Whats. I'd like to describe that problem here. You see, the fact is that just because two things are equal, that does not mean that they are the same. In our language, we often use the word "is" as a sign of equality. We say that 2 + 2 is 4, or that smiling is happiness. Even in that last one, though you know it to be untrue, there is still a bit of "Huh, that actually sounds kinda true to me." going on in your mind, now isn't there?

2 + 2 is NOT 4. 

2 + 2 equals 4, but they are not the same thing. If you take 3 seconds to look at them both you'll realize that.

 

this:  

2 + 2

 

looks nothing like 

this:

 4.

 

Just look at them, the symbols look nothing alike. They are not the same thing visually. Therefore, they cannot be the same thing in their entirety, because a visual trait is still a part of the metrics labeled "traits", and in these metrics, there's a discrepancy. Being the same means being equal on all metrics, not just one or two. Equality has less demanding standards, but this situation is yet another portrayal of mistaking a What for a WHO. My friends, we must never mistake something's equality for its identity. If you can comprehend that being equal does not make you the same, then you can come to see that the reverse is also true. You can begin to see that being "not the same" doesn't necessarily make you unequal.

Seeing as to the fact that when two WHOs are very different, they often come to hate each other. You can see that, just because you hate someone different than you, that doesn't make them any less worthy of the respect, kindness, love, or whatever else you have, because them being different, or hated by you, doesn't mean that they are unequal to you. In this case, it's a rarer form of mistake. This is the idea of mistaking WHOs for Whats. No matter WHO someone is, you should never assume that they are worth any more or less than you. You should never assume What their value is to be unequal, or worth less than yours just because of WHO they are as a person. You shouldn't even assume that they're worth more than you either. 

When you come to see true WHOs, you WILL be able to see countless more of their Whats, but again, Whats do not create emotion. They only attract or repel without them. If you feel that they deserve less than you, chances are that you're viewing the WHO behind the What, because, as stated in the past, feelings are essential in how you make decisions, including the decision on how you'll treat another person, item, or group.

Remember my friends, what matters in life isn't if you dislike something, or even if you like it. What matters, is what it is, and we should always assume that every WHO IS worthy of love… at least until proven false beyond a reasonable doubt. That my friends, is true empathy, and justice. Practice that, and watch the obstacles of the world unfold before you, like a parting of the seas.

Work Cited

Cox, Elizabeth. “Can You Outsmart the Fallacy That Started a Witch Hunt?” YouTube, 26 Oct. 2020, youtu.be/L9rkQJ91VOE?si=Bx6Q3jlQtVlBYCI_. Accessed 31 Dec. 2024.