Experimentation is in the core of human creativity, learning and meaning but I can’t escape the thought of the risk of wastefulness that comes from anecdotal (purposeless) making.
If you’re making for making sake with no purpose and longevity (of the type that experimental marketing could be accused of) are you being wasteful with your clients’ money, and more importantly your attention (which seems to be the most scarce resource, as the internet, and advertising is telling us).
Is there a way of experimenting inside your head?
If everything is possible (within the icing frame), then is there a methodology that can use the concept of finishing a thought (constructing an argument)?
I’d argue that the idea of soundness of validity could could be valuable here:
A deductive argument is said to be valid if and only if it takes a form that makes it impossible for the premises to be true and the conclusion nevertheless to be false. Otherwise, a deductive argument is said to be invalid.
A deductive argument is sound if and only if it is both valid, and all of its premises are actually true. Otherwise, a deductive argument is unsound.
In short, a deductive argument must be evaluated in two ways. First, one must ask if the premises provide support for the conclusion by examing the form of the argument. If they do, then the argument is valid. Then, one must ask whether the premises are true or false in actuality. Only if an argument passes both these tests is it sound. However, if an argument does not pass these tests, its conclusion may still be true, despite that no support for its truth is given by the argument.
As always, I welcome discussion around this (or any other daily thoughts).
P.s. the use of the word scarcity is inspired by the book of the same name