B. U. G. S.

Simmons,

Horus has done excellent work on practical politics, but these posts on “An Example of Missing the Point” and “Near Misses” are the real lesson of practical politics.

We are NOT faced with any task that requires us to be intelligent. Nor do we need to be equipped with any deep insights. We don’t even need to apprehend the situational logic we find ourselves in. And we don’t need to concern ourselves with our opponents’ motives.

That’s because believing we have to be smart gives an opening to our opponents, unintentional concessions that allow us to slip into the “near misses” Bob is talking about. These “near misses” are unintentional concessions that say, “I have to be full of true information and deep insights to oppose you”. The mistake is in believing there is something to be argued when the truth is far simpler. The mistake is giving an opening to our opponents they don’t deserve.

Semmelweis had nothing to argue. Actually, he didn’t have to know anything. The results of his method (washing his hands) spoke for itself.

Understanding how the example of Semmelweis relates to the Mantra allows us to shed a lot of baggage.

It is great guidance on how not to stray, on how to avoid getting mired in argument, and on how to avoid making concessions, however unintentional they may be.