Facts as Strategies
Do facts actually exist as strategic facts? Is communication as well as consensus a social trade-off rather than an here and now scheme? We need to be critical here.
First, our perception of axioms is, for the most part, borderline unclear. This formal ambiguity leaves open the possibility that axioms exist and are self-evident, or that they are the result of a game played by some members of society.
Imagine that a distribution is being made in society, and that this distribution is made by a clever strategy that allows each person’s decision to exert some influence, but requires considerations of fairness that sound very reasonable and consistent with intuitive judgments, then let us assume a game in which: each participant simultaneously throws any integer from 1 to 10, and then we divide the reward among the individuals who choose exactly the median, and if there are more such individuals, the reward is divided equally. This sounds like the number 5 is the most likely winner, but if the insight is discovered by other members, then the median of the contest sinks to zero.
With this belief, the final choice of zero sounds logical. Imagine that in the absence of authoritative guidance, it is likely that 0 will not be the answer for everyone, or even for the majority, but when some sort of convenience or publicity emerges, and when this belief is widely disseminated, the participants in the game are caught up in the decision.
Thus, through the belief in convenience, a certain fact is created. When an acknowledgement of the fact brings convenience far beyond the inconvenience of questioning the implementation, and the idea is fully accepted by the thinker, we need to stop and reflect on whether the self-evident axiom, in its essence, is nothing more than a convenience for the whole of humanity throughout time.
Finally, returning to the hot topic, as more and more people are passively drawn into the vortex of the big language model and enjoy its conveniences, we need to be alert to whether some new convenience is being erected. This manipulation comes from data and algorithms, and ultimately from data again. The good and bad of data and reasoning, in the guise of convenience, ultimately have an indelible impact on distribution.
Only this time, are the facts that underlie the decision truly transparent to all participants?