When You See Only A Portion of the "Truth", You Form an "Opinion"

steemitph (64)in #steemph • 6 years ago

One of the main things that attracted me toward the blockchain is its concept of " shared single source of truth". Where "truth" is achieved via consensus algorithms. Long before the blockchain's existence, truth by consensus' been embraced in philosophy as a process for taking statements to be true based on people's general agreement. In this article, I will put philosophical beliefs, next to the implementation of blockchain, more specifically the Steem Blockchain to share my views about why newer Steemians should seek to understand how things work, and avert frustrations from their opinion on how things should work.

A Hint: These views aren't worth much in as far as the network is concerned, so you should probably leave and move on to the next post with great looking photos, or the one showing a great life by the beach, or that one with a humanitarian cause.

Not All Opinions Are Equal

In philosophy, there is a common misconception that all opinions are equal, therefore there is no point debating the weight of each of the varying opinions. We would have had very dull and boring elections if that was the case, and the search for philosophical truth where there are no stablished facts through argumentation and debate wouldn't have propagated.

In multiple Dialogues including but not limited to Meno (380 B.C.E) and The Republic (360 B.C.E) Plato broke down cognitive activity into four levels.

Imagination ~ Plato is known for what seemed to be a love-hate relationship with the arts. On one hand he referred to them often in his Dialogues which would have meant paying close attention to it, on the other he's made multiple remarks about the arts which can be deemed demeaning for the artists. Imagination leading to art was seen by Plato as the lowest grade of cognitive activity, where the version of reality is based on images ("imperfect copy of copy of the ideal").
Belief ~ Based on perceivable objects rather than the intelligible realms. Viewing reality based on sensible particulars and not much of anything else.
Thought ~ Views based on eternal truth rather than just the physical reality.
Understanding ~ Math is the highest form of discipline for Plato. He views understanding as a cognitive process that includes a combination of pure (objective), abstract, and theoretical reasoning.

The weight of a philosophical opinion is based on which level of cognitive activity was involved in argumentation. For the purpose of this article, I would refer to that as evidence.

Stake Weighted Vote whether for the maintenance of the network through your witness votes, or an upvote given to a post works in a similar way. What "evidence" does to the weight of a philosophical opinion, is what "stake" does to ones influence in the Steem Blockchain, or any other DPOS blockchain. There are many available articles explaining the differences between consensus algorithms, particularly the earlier ones; Proof of Work (POW) and Proof of Stake (POS). Most of you who've been in the blockchain space for at least half a year, will be able to differentiate the two quite easily. I will not cover those in this article to avoid making the post longer than it should be. Delegated Proof of Stake (DPOS) however as a relatively new consensus algorithm, is not as popularly known. Explain Delegated Proof of Stake Like I’m 5 written by a seasoned Steemian @stellabelle covered the concepts in really simple language, like she intended, easy enough even for a five year old to understand.

Do Not Let Your Version of the "Truth" Frustrate You

I spent yesterday morning reading posts and comments from one Steemian. A Steemian from the Philippines' been expressing his frustration about the quality of content produced by Filipino Steemians. He makes very valid arguments when taken as is, setting aside how the system is built to work, its history, and the concept of Stake Weighted Vote.

_{"When users vote on content, their influence over the distribution of the rewards pool is directly proportional to the amount of SP that they have. Users with more SP have more influence on the distribution of rewards. This means that SP is an access token that grants its holders exclusive powers within the Steem platform." ~ page 8 paragraph 6 of the Steem White Paper}

_{"Steem operates on the basis of one-STEEM, one-vote. Under this model, individuals who have contributed the most to the platform, as measured by their account balance, have the most influence over how contributions are scored. Stake can be bought or earned. Users can not gain additional influence by owning multiple accounts, since one single account with an amount of stake will have the same influence as two different accounts sharing the same amount of stake. The only way for users to increase their influence in the platform is to increase their stake."}

_{"Furthermore, Steem only allows members to vote with STEEM when it is committed to a 13 week vesting schedule called Steem Power. Under this model, members have a financial incentive to vote in a way that maximises the long term value of their STEEM." ~ page 2 paragraphs 6 and 7 of the Steem Blue Paper}

I have taken these paragraphs from the Steem White Paper and Blue Paper to put across a point that the valuation of a contribution does not rest on anyone specifically, and how the economy of Steem is driven in such a way where ones stake determines the level of his or her influence. In the current set up, there is a mechanism to disagree by downvoting/flagging, but that too is based on ones stake. One can only disagree as much as his or her Steem Power holding.

I am not saying we don't have to do things to seek to improve the quality of contents produced specially from those that are in close proximity to us, but allowing your version of the "truth" about "quality" frustrate you will never result to much unless you do something about it. Here are the alternatives available:

Increase your stake to 1,000 MVest, then define the parameters of your curation effort based on your version of "true" quality.
Build your own network that will work based on your ideals.
Offer your services to help newer Steemians improve the quality of their content. This one can get quite frustrating too if you are not open to the idea of how changing mindset often takes a long time. I say the first two options are your best bet.

The network is built in such a way where not all opinions are equal determined by "stake" to protect itself. I linked an article written by the brain of DPOS in Additional Readings for reference. There are two conflicting views that often come up:

"Everybody has something to offer" and "Steemit Might not be for Everyone". In the end it is the network which will decide. To some extent it is already doing so. Everybody can contribute, but as you would have noticed, not everybody is rewarded as much. The truth remains however, that the valuation of contributions does not rest on individuals, but the network as a whole.

6 years ago in #steemph by steemitph (64)

$10.58

STEEM 0.16

TRX 0.15

JST 0.028

BTC 56615.57

ETH 2387.60

USDT 1.00

SBD 2.30

When You See Only A Portion of the "Truth", You Form an "Opinion"

Not All Opinions Are Equal

Do Not Let Your Version of the "Truth" Frustrate You

Image Credits:

Sources & References:

Additional Readings:

Coin Marketplace