poster_production_1000px

So often in our daily lives we are confronted with information whose validity we should question, and yet we almost never follow through. Few ask the important questions, and even fewer truly investigate to ensure the veracity of… anything.

We’re left wondering who and what we can trust, how, why, and to what extent.  We believe there should be an easy-to-follow methodology for testing the general applicability and trustworthiness of any given bit of knowledge.

Try this simple checklist of your sources:

1) Is the source’s objective to examine and explain things as accurately, logically and scientifically as possible or does the source have competing motives and incentives?

2) Does the source keep track of its output and provide you with ongoing feedback on its accuracy and limitations? Does the source update you with better understandings as they become available?

3) Does the source provide full documentation about its capacity to take on a subject and comprehensively understanding it – including its sources?

4) Does the source provide access to their basis, their sources, and their reasoning?

5) Did the source ever intentionally provide misleading, incomplete or inaccurate information?

6) Does the source try to establish the systems and frameworks that information and facts and knowledge operate within or does the source cherry-pick or apply non-verified non-dynamic, non-systemic, non-contextual data, studies, ideas or ideologies in order to fortify their agenda?

7) Is the source judged by a proof process? 

This is by no means an exhaustive list, but it is meant as a primer to a more rigorous investigation. We urge doubt, we urge skepticism and we urge healthy inquiry. Subjecting what we hold to be true to the white-hot fire of a systemic scrutiny will only ever bring us closer to understanding the Truth.


Wayfinder is an initiative to develop a systemic and universally applicable proof process model.

If one manufactures a product or provides a service, Wayfinder will encourage that they process and document accumulated knowledge that demonstrates that they diligently, systemically, and logically attempted to make sure to maximize Nurture, Equality, Truth and Systems while avoiding harm.

If one is a judge or jury, it is the process and documentation that demonstrates that they diligently, systemically, and logically attempted to reach a warranted conclusion.

If one is a consumer wishing to be healthy, wealthy and wise, it is the process of accumulating validated information and knowledge, applying systems and perspectives to that source material, and determining the Nurture, Equality, Truth and Systems behind their sources and in front of their choices.

 


 

Our starting point is a pyramidal scaffolding of progressive reasoning. We call it the Proof Process – an essential component in the pursuit of Truth.

Our ‘proof process’ is meant to be a simple methodology that people can apply to information. As a system, it is designed to check knowledge. It complements, not supplants, the scientific method.

The ideal process is a generative system that begins with an objective. Next, we identify and define the variables as well as the relationship between them and the contexts in which they are rooted. We then characterize the data with measures of validity as outlined above.

The associations between verified data are organized visually, allowing us to understand the overarching associations between different sections of the scaffold we establish. Correlations, patterns, and exchanges are bundled to address the objective and yield some conclusion. The process is built upon the concept of consilience- the convergence of independent lines of evidence and reasoning leading to an inexorable conclusion.

Contact us to become a part of this bold project.

More information on Proof Process and Truth.

2 thoughts on “Prove It

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>