Quoting the article, you could probably find out it said, ‘observe everything and anything’, whilst excluding the definitive you pointed out, ‘all the time’. I of course excluded that point for a reason, though I did not point that out. I agree with you that it would be heavily exhausting, much like advising a singer to practice singing all the time. Observe everything and anything simply means a person doesn’t have to put a limit on what he/she should observe, not the length of time they should observe it. Your second argument was presented on my suggestion that a person should test out their observational skills on fictional work. It’s just my opinion, you might prove me wrong, someone else might prove me right, it’s all about opinions. But the book I recommended was beautiful, mysterious, and the clues while clear and logical, still proved largely unpredictable. It was one of those ‘we’re all thinking forward, because we believe it has to be forward, neglecting there’s really no law standing against it being backwards’ kind of logic.
Jason Ken
Karma: 6
I wouldn’t really term this set exercises, as more of a continuous course of mental acuity development. Try to use the recommended exercise book as an observational material. People’s opinions differ, but clues are meant to be studied. You can check it out through this link
https://www.lesswrong.com/posts/Pr2PcAqKRu9qKBCHd/principles-of-perception
1 vote
Overall karma indicates overall quality.
0 votes
Agreement karma indicates agreement, separate from overall quality.
Quoting the article, you could probably find out it said, ‘observe everything and anything’, whilst excluding the definitive you pointed out, ‘all the time’. I of course excluded that point for a reason, though I did not point that out. I agree with you that it would be heavily exhausting, much like advising a singer to practice singing all the time. Observe everything and anything simply means a person doesn’t have to put a limit on what he/she should observe, not the length of time they should observe it. Your second argument was presented on my suggestion that a person should test out their observational skills on fictional work. It’s just my opinion, you might prove me wrong, someone else might prove me right, it’s all about opinions. But the book I recommended was beautiful, mysterious, and the clues while clear and logical, still proved largely unpredictable. It was one of those ‘we’re all thinking forward, because we believe it has to be forward, neglecting there’s really no law standing against it being backwards’ kind of logic.