Unguided Blog

The trouble with the group of acquired perception is they are extremely vocal, and they are often cited as experts by numerous sources. Not only they pump, via media, a variety of interesting but useless b.s. that does not make sense, they also alter or adversely affect the natural perception group, because the latter think the former as locals.

First things first, I consider any information, idea, observation made naturally from outside, by a non-local an invaluable contribution. See, as locals we are inside our little box, have never had the opportunity to look from outside or above. The constraints that stop us are not only geographical. The biases, habits and all follow us wherever we go. So, we will never have the opportunity to have that different angle, the angle of the outsider, fresh, unprecedented, free of all that in a way poison us, yet at the same time make us who we are.

Read the rest of this entry »

Before we begin our debunking journey, let me complete the theoretical framework to a certain extent. In Days of Disinformation I pinpointed three groups disseminating disinformation, namely, those who are paid to do so, foreigners with a naturally different perception and locals with different acquired perception; and we added that subjects of the third group, locals educated a la Western style have a disadvantage to form associations between concepts which is vital to critical thinking.

The problem is two-fold and both are related to language. In this article we shall only investigate critical thinking deficiency resulting from lack of concept association.

Read the rest of this entry »

A typical mind educated in the West is linear, it has been structured that way in the name of deeper analysis, ceteris paribus. It is aware that by keeping all variables but two constant, it creates an artificial world, and thinks that it is necessary, often desirable, and most of the time the only way. This strategy works surprisingly well, in the West that is.

I often come across an article, a comment, or a news story etc, trying to analyze Turkey. Rarely I agree with them. In approximately half of the cases, if I jump to the conclusion I would agree to it, but when I start from the beginning, with the author’s premises, my conclusion will not be the same or be a completely different one. This naturally follows to a scenario in which even if the wording of the conclusion is the same, its meaning is not, or different premises are required for me to reach the author’s conclusion. It is I call a natural difference of perception.

Read the rest of this entry »