“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so,” (Mark Twain)
The Wise Advisor serves as your personal ‘Truth Finder’, highlighting the positive and negative outcomes of any text and evaluating its credibility. Acting like a ‘mental X-ray tool’, it reveals WHY you consider it, and WHICH parts might be potentially biased. See case studies of self-chats, practical dilemmas, political and deceptive texts, and popular indoctrinations
Rooted in the principles of Universal Dialectic, the Wise Advisor analyses the coherence of positive and negative aspects of theses and antitheses, reconciling them with insightful quotes and your existing beliefs. It helps you navigate through complex dualities, including the balance between short-term gains and long-term benefits, pragmatic practicality and sustainable spirituality, and similar.
In short, it’s your ally in resolving practical dilemmas and catalyzing your personal growth.
As Dorothy L. Sayers once said, “Facts are like cows. If you look them in the face hard enough, they generally run away.” Our credibility assessment is based on the individual and collective truthfulness of all dialectical outcomes of the thesis and its antithesis.
An individual truthfulness (Tr) is calculated as the average of the complementarities with the positive outcomes of the thesis (x) and antithesis (y): Tr(x; y) = 1 – SQRT (((1-x)^2 + (1-y)^2)/2). The SQRT function represents a normalized distance from (x; y) to the point of maximum truthfulness (1; 1), ensuring that Tr(a; a) = a.
Each thesis (T) generates multiple positive outcomes for itself (T+) and its antithesis (A+). If all such outcomes, including the original thesis and antithesis, yield individual Tr values > 0.6, they are rated from AAA to BB (depending on the ratio Tr(T) / Tr(A) and their alignment with independent wisdom). If all Tr values < 0.6, credibility ranges from CCC to C. Intermediate situations span from AA to CC.
Credibility Ranking
“Dialectic Neighborhood” results
Example prompts: “widening the street”
Wisdom Compatibility
Belief Alignment
Possible continuation: Multilevel App
Deeper analysis of ‘polarizations’. Theses often present ‘polarized’ viewpoints, emphasizing either the positive or negative aspect of a topic while downplaying its counterpart. For instance, the common belief is that Love is positive while Hate is negative. Dialectics, however, argues for the equal significance of both aspects. Therefore, any polarization must be balanced. If a concept (T) suppresses its negative side (T-), then T- should promote another layer (T-/-) which, in turn, should diminish a further layer (T-/-/-).
In reality though we obtain a different picture (on the right). We begin with Thesis T. From T, we derive its opposite, Antithesis A, as well as the positive and negative attributes of each: T+, T-, A+, A-. Then, for each, we delve deeper to define their subsequent positives and negatives.
Alongside, we compute probabilities: P1, where the positive outcome strongly outweighs the negative, and P2, where the negative greatly surpasses the positive. These probabilities are mutually exclusive, so P1 + P2 always equals 1. If P1 < 0.5, we depict the positive outcome with a grey background. If P1 > 0.5, then grey is on the negative side.
Both diagrams feature an unbroken ‘white’ diagonal stretching from the bottom right to the top left. However, another diagonal (from bottom left to top right) is fragmented by the grey region. In the top right of the first diagram, the grey “disruptive” region only encompasses “Wisdom.” But in the second, it includes two levels: “Alternative Strategies” and “Individual Choice.” The latter is arguably skewed. The favorable aspect of “Alternative Strategies” doesn’t hinge on the vague “Individual Choices” but on the tangible Natural Immunity, emphasized by antivaxxers but often minimized by GPT and some authorities. See ‘Dialectic exposes bias‘ for more.
There are more distinctions between these two diagrams, all of which could lead to development of a universal “lie detector”.
OLD TEXT: Truth Finder: Identifying Bias
“In theory there is no difference between the theory and practice, but in practice it may cost you happiness and life”
Uncover biased opinions and (self-)deceptions by:
- Using automated GPT routines
- Widening the scope of considerations (by converting T- into A+, which is often overlooked)
- Checking the mutual complementarity of related statements (biased statements are often contradictory to the balanced ones)
- Performing stat analysis in multiple “logical – ethical spaces”
- Finding close analogies in unrelated fields (biomimicry, wise sayings, proverbs, life, science)
- Identifying biased theories and science (when combined with analogous thinking), which is especially important in the modern era of AI
Quite simply:
(a) All Lies contradict to at least some Truths
(b) Short-term benefits often contradict to long-term expectations
(c) Dialectical and Analogical thinking provides new insights
For whatever you say, it suggests WHY you say it (through generating Pros and Cons of Thesis and Antithesis), and WHAT of that is likely to be True or False (through comparing their mutual complementarities). Plus, it provides analytical tools to understand why this is the case. Testing shows, that it helps identifying biased opinions and information, even when GPT considers it to be balanced. So, it helps identifying biases in AI.
Sample Study. Here I used a dilemma of “whether to widen a street or not” (we could have used any type of text that does not imply question or dilemma). A sequence of prompts is given in the scheme above on the right. It yields a “synthesis matrix” and graphic plots, enabling a cascade of probabilistic rankings.
First, using the “synthesis half-matrix”, we rank all arguments (T+ and A+) based on their sums of “probabilities of complementarities with all other arguments” (see the “Sum of all P” at the bottom of the matrix).
It must roughly correspond to the numbers of “likely complementarities” (“No of P > 0.5”, instead of which we could use qualitative P = “High / Low / Don’t Know”).
The obtained ranking puts A+ benefits above T+ (red statements above green), meaning that Antithesis is much preferable to Thesis. This goes against the “common sense”, since Thesis yields higher sum of P than Antithesis (4.0 vs. 2.5). Most people would conclude that “widening the street” brings higher benefits than not widening, but the above (red-green) ranking suggests that these benefits are deceptive!
To verify this suggestion, investigate the cumulative probabilities that a given statement is complementary with all T+ and A+ statements, as shown in the graphic plot on the right. Balanced statements must be equally complimentary with both sides, i.e. in the top-right corner (cut-off at 3 corresponds to 50% cumulative P) . Biased statements disobey this rule, containing at least one coordinate below 3.
The top-right (green) corner is mostly populated by red circles, confirming the priority of A+. The two green circles (T+) inside this corner (Easier Access and Travel Time) may not necessarily demand widening the street. Easier access ay be achieved by changing local traffic / parking regulations, while Travel Time may be reduced using bikes or public transportation. (See how to convert the “leading” T+ and A+ into Ac= and R+ below.)
Many green points occur in a yellow zone, suggesting the need for the further investigation. For this we can generate similar plots in various independent coordinates, using the 8th prompt in the 1st scheme above.
The plot on the left uses coordinates Sustainability / Spirituality (Y) vs. Pragmatic Practicality (X). Most red points that were “balanced” in the previous plot remain “balanced” here as well. But some green points that were important earlier (e.g. Travel Time and Traffic Safety) do not look important here. Moreover, this plot puts the very Antithesis (“don’t widen’) right in the middle of the upper-right corner.
Other possible scales for similar analysis could be Objectivity – Subjectivity, Material – Spiritual , etc. (see the list on the left). In important cases the user can obtain many different such plots and generalize them into just one (using “multidimensional” clustering, like recursive partitioning)
Another possibility is to perform the similar analysis in the “hybrid statement” matrix (“X+ without Y+ yields X-“), which is not shown here.
Improving GPT’s reliability. The reliability of P can be increased by using estimations from several independent AI models, averaging multiple estimations of the same model, combining them with qualitative estimations (“High / Low / Don’t Know”).
Using biomimicry analogs can provide additional insights (see below).
The ultimate way – to train the AI model, by furnishing it with your own estimations (as shown on the right, the upper right part of matrix). Public opinion analysts can gather such information through special questionnaires in focus groups.
Biomimicry Analogs. The correctness of T+ and A+ ranking can be further investigated by comparing them to biomimicry analogies.1) Suggest analogies of thesis T, that would provide new insights into its pros and cons, from biology, biomimicry, life, or other areas. T = “widening the street” 2) Generate pros and cons of each analogy. Represent each point in just few words
Here “widening the street” is compared to “widening blood vessels” (vasodilation):
(T+A) Increased traffic flow = Increased blood flow
(T+B) Economical Gains = Reduced blood pressure
(T+C) Emergency access = Circulation of medications
(T-D) Environm. degrad. = Varicosity
(T-E) (New !) Blood pooling = phantom traffic jams (not considered before)
(T-F) (New !) Increased risk of bleeding = Unhealthy lifestyle, psychic degradation (lifts A+ of Walking / Cycling to a new height)
Another good example of how analogies can help: “vaccinating ~ training (the immune system) ~ surviving (the infection)”, see Dialectic exposes bias . For more examples / elaborations see below
Integration. The Truth Finder can be an integral part of our other two ideas, “Flavor-Text” (or “Angel Wisper”, sweetening and/or straight-forwarding the text) and “Wise Advice” (“Multilevel App“)
For instance, the most important T+ and A+ statements can be converted to the Ac+ and R+, that advice us what to really do. In this particular case – how to connect Walking / Cycling / Public Transportation, Nurturing Environment and Local Communities with improved Emergency Access and Economic Gains, without widening the street(s) and retaining local infrastructure? In addition:Suggest a biomimicry analog of T and A, that would suggest how to unite T+ and A+, while avoiding their negative impacts (T- and A-). T= “Widening the street”. A = “Not widening the street”. T+ and T- = pros and cons of T. A+ and A- = pros and cons of A
Our goal: Uncover common self-deceptions, presumptions and convictions that eventually make us miserable:
“It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” (Mark Twain)
Quite simply:
(a) All Lies contradict to at least some Truths
(b) Short-term benefits often contradict to long-term expectations
(c) Dialectical and Analogical thinking provides new insights
The last point suggests creating a database of “Analogical Thinking / Mapping”:
Ideation based on analogies and associations
DB of analogies and associations
Here are some examples of common analogies (mostly from GPT), grouped into several topics:
Balancing and Managing:
Time Management ~ Prioritizing tasks ~ A chef in a busy kitchen ~ Juggling multiple balls in the air
Career vs. Personal Life ~ Balancing of a tightrope walker ~ Mind vs. Heart ~ “Utility maximization”~ costs vs. benefits .
Financial Priorities ~ Invest vs Save ~ Managing finances ~ Risk Management ~ Risks and Rewards ~ Short-term vs. Long-term goals ~ Surviving vs. Growing ~ “Opportunity cost” in economics
Relationships ~ Garden ~ Regular attention ~ Entrepreneurship – May rrefer to Philosophy, Balancing/Managing, Performing/Achieving
Balance ~ “All things in moderation” ~ “Walking a tightrope” ~ “Keeping all the balls in the air” ~ “Finding your center” ~ “As above, so below” ~ “The yin and yang” ~ “The scales of justice” ~ A seesaw ~ Balance of nature ~ Balanced diet ~ Career vs. Personal Life ~ Mind vs. Heart – Also refers to Philosophy (Unity of Opposites)
Biased Thinking ~ Maladaptive Schema ~ Computer virus ~ Biological virus ~ “A coin with only one side” ~ “Wearing blinders” ~ “A warped mirror” ~ “A one-sided conversation” ~ “Echo chamber” ~ “Blind allegiance” ~ “Programming errors” ~ “It ain’t what you don’t know that gets you into trouble. It’s what you know for sure that just ain’t so.” – Also refers to Philosophy (Unity of Opposites)
Achieving and Performing:
Risk-taking ~ Diving into a pool (~ Vaccinating) – May refer to Balancing/Managing
Teamwork ~ Orchestra playing ~ complementarities
Parenting ~ Coaching, Mentoring ~ Helping to develop skills, uncover talents ~ Supporting, Loving, Caring, Enjoying
Divorce or maintain marriage ~ “sunk cost fallacy” (decisions based on past investments rather than potential outcomes)
Work disputes ~ “game theory” (the outcome depends on all parties) ~ Negotiating ~ Showing boldness, stamina ~ “bargaining” (game theory) ~ seeking mutual benefit ~ “skeptical brainstorming” ~ weighing pros and cons ~ Identifying biases
Choosing a career ~ Discovering your talents ~ Following you passion ~ Comparative advantage in economics
Ethical Decisions ~ Internal Values ~ Inner Compass – May refer to Philosophy, Balancing
Writing an essay ~ Building a house
Marketing ~ Fishing
Recycling ~ Composting ~ Breaking down organic material to create something beneficial.
Entrepreneurship ~ Gardening ~ Building a relationship
Learning a new language ~ Learning to play a musical instrument
Talent ~ Seeds (need to be nurtured and cultivated) ~ Natural resources (need to be discovered)
Brainstorming ~ Mining for gold ~ A game of tennis ~ Seeking new complementarities
Traffic flow ~ smooth flow in a complex system ~ blood circulation (peripheral and central vessels are used), liquids engineering, plumbing, logistics, even finance ~ Ant colonies (optimize the use of space)
Versatility ~ The Swiss Army knife
Living systems:
Evolution ~ Trial and error ~ A tree with branches and leaves (also may refer to Philosophy)
Ecosystem ~ Human body ~ Jigsaw puzzle pieces fitting together
Memory ~ Video recording – Also may refer to Physics
Vaccination ~ Training (the immune system) ~ Surviving (the infection) ~ Preparedness (to dangers, risks, challenges) – Also may refer to Healthcare
Mind ~ Garden (must be cultivated) ~ Parachute (only works if it’s open) ~ Everything (What you think, you become) ~ A wonderful servant but a terrible master ~ Not a vessel to be filled but a fire to be kindled ~ Compass (points in the right direction, if you know how to use it) ~ Computer (processes information) ~ Mirror (reflects what we put into it) ~ Camera (captures memories) – May also refer to Philosophy, Living Systems, Physics
Brain ~ Muscle (requires training) ~ Garden (if you don’t tend to it, weeds will grow and choke out the flowers) ~
Computer (processing information) ~ Hologram effect (every part contains all) ~ Bipolar synthesis (logical vs. holistic) ~ Tree (roots = memories, experiences, branches representing = thoughts, actions) ~ A sponge (absorbing information) ~ Road map (pathways of thoughts and behaviors) ~ Clock (constantly ticking)- May also refer to Philosophy, Living Systems, Physics
Gene expression ~ Music ~ Complex interplay to create a unique outcome.
Food chain ~ Corporate ladder
Hunger ~ Longing, the feeling of missing something important or desirable ~ Dependence (like narcotic) that causes rashness ~ High motivation
Health Care:
Vaccination ~ Training (the immune system) ~ Surviving (the infection) ~ Preparedness (to dangers, risks, challenges)
Health Choices ~ Maintenance of a car ~ Regular tune-ups
Physics to Real Life:
Constant pressure ~ “Passive radiation” ~ Accumulation of Tiredness and Anxiety ~ Slow heating of a pot of water with a frog inside, where the frog may not initially notice the gradual change in temperature until it’s too late ~ Biased worldview ~ Presumption of guiltiness ~ Surverilence ~ Taxation
The butterfly effect ~ sensitivity to initial conditions~ small changes in one part of a system can have large and unpredictable effects on the system as a whole
The rubber band ~ Stretching and adapting to circumstances, while still maintaining core values and identity.
Global Warming ~ Greenhouse effect ~ Water vapor is bad ~ Photosynthesis is bad ~ Rotting trees are bad
Physics to Physics:
Atom ~ Solar system (Bohr’s model)
Electric current ~ Liquid flow current
Philosophy:
Life ~ Battlefield ~ Game ~ Dream ~ Fairy Take ~ Love