The Distinction between Judgement and Assumption

[samijiben]

Please share any thoughts you have about the distinction between judgement and assumption to help fuel my contemplative efforts.

AI: 

Quote

Assumptions are things we accept as true without proof, while judgments are formed after considering available information and evidence

 

The line gets blurry, however, which is why I brought this topic to the forum

[Joshe]

From higher consciousness: 

Assumption: used to substitute fact for the purpose of moving forward 

Judgement: something you assert as true, often based on subjective values, and also for the purpose of moving forward. 

Lower levels of consciousness make both of these unconsciously, usually to serve the ego. In higher consciousness, they are tools for ideation, testing, and progress, and they can be discarded upon seeing they are incorrect/inferior. Judgements are the trickier ones to let go of because identity is usually involved. 

it is an interesting question to ask “am I acting from assumption or judgement?”. But I’m failing to see how this contemplation bears any fruit. I assume you are seeking clarity. And if you are seeking clarity with no goal in mind or no problem to solve, I will judge this endeavor as fruitless, to put it mildly. Lol. 

Maybe that gets some juices flowing.

 

Edited August 19 by Joshe

[theleelajoker]

2 hours ago, samijiben said:

1. Please share any thoughts you have about the distinction between judgement and assumption to help fuel my contemplative efforts.

AI: 

 

The line gets blurry, however, which is why I brought this topic to the forum

I think where it gets blurry is that judgement can also work as an assumption depending on context, time frame.

Example:

• You loose your job, your gf breaks up, you car breaks down
• You judge the situation as "bad" because you experience right now negative consequences, a decrease in life quality.
• Examples: You can afford less, you worry about future (job), you are sad for not having company, Sex, intimacy (gf),your way to work takes double, can't make weekend long weekend trips (car)
• But it turns out, that 6 months later:

1. Because you lost your job, you reorientate and find a even better one
2. Because one gf left, you realize that your happier on your own or find a gf that fits even better 
3. You start using bike 🚲 and are feeling much better and healthier 

So you judged something is bad, but as information and evidence changed, you realize that your judgement was actually an assumption.

As soon as you introduce the dimension of time, things get IMO a bit blurry.

You can still say "I don't like the consequences now" and be aware that your judgement is fluid, and take the assumption that it can be good in the long run even judged negatively now 

Edited August 19 by theleelajoker

[Aaron p]

Assumption is da mother of all fuck ups

[UnbornTao]

An assumption is an unrecognized belief you operate from - like the water a fish swims in. Your sense of reality is based on a set of unexamined assumptions. What do we assume assumption is?

A judgment is a positive or negative value assessment of something.

The point of contemplation is to start from scratch, though. Thinking existentially. Wrestling with that process in order to personally find out what's true.

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

The point of contemplation is to start from scratch, though. Thinking existentially. Wrestling with that process in order to personally find out what's true

We can ask “what is it”. What is a thing, then identify as much as we can about the thing, including it’s similarities and differences that distinguish it from another thing. But if we were to put significant resources into making distinctions about every two similar things without discretion, that’d be a good way to squander life. 

I see some threads that I can tell contemplation is being done for contemplation’s sake, where people just want to play around for fun first, and they’re actually not interested in what is true because that would mean the theorizing would come to an end. Nothing wrong with that, but it is a trap that thinkers should be aware of. 

Edited August 19 by Joshe

[Joshe]

2 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

A judgment is a positive or negative value assessment of something.

Judgements can be neutral and objective. Like those passed down from a court judge. 

[UnbornTao]

40 minutes ago, Joshe said:

Judgements can be neutral and objective. Like those passed down from a court judge. 

Right, I didn't think about that.

But assessment, evaluation, and judgment are based on interpretation, so the idea of them being truly neutral and objective is hard to see. What would that even mean? Isn't interpretation inherently subjective? I may be dense here, but it seems worth looking into.

Maybe "fair," "impartial," or "just" would be more accurate qualifiers, at least from my perspective. But I get your point.

Group contemplation!

[Joshe]

33 minutes ago, UnbornTao said:

Right, I didn't think about that.

But assessment, evaluation, and judgment are based on interpretation, so the idea of them being truly neutral and objective is hard to see. What would that even mean? Isn't interpretation inherently subjective? I may be dense here, but it seems worth looking into.

Maybe "fair," "impartial," or "just" would be more accurate qualifiers, at least from my perspective. But I get your point.

Group contemplation!

Yeah, it does seem like a good thing to contemplate, or at least mentally stimulating. 

Impartiality is a virtue that one cultivates. The impartial evaluation of evidence is a process aimed at arriving at what is true, but that process itself is not a judgement.

Maybe a judgement is a position taken based on the assessment. The position can be one of practicality and/or one of morality, but usually, probably both. 

We do it all the time. When Leo makes a judgement about something, he's asserting the findings and their implications of all the things he's carefully considered. It can be objective. If it couldn't be, the very word "objective" need not exist. 

The real gold would be in contemplating how to cultivate impartiality. 

Edited August 19 by Joshe

[samijiben]

Thank you all for your responses.

I have arrived at the conclusion that judgement and assumption are so intimately interwined...

That the very distinction between them would be both an assumption and a judgement (or a series of both acting with and against each other)!

That is to say that any question that can be asked must must must be grounded on baseless assumptions and judgements...

Judging by the situation, the question is valid...

And one assumes that the question CAN be answered, otherwise...

Why even ask it at all?

Seeking and problem-solving as a past time or hobby makes sense because one feels bored and so occupies their time.

But acting out of a place of neccesity, that is, pretending as if any of "This" matters and holds any "objective standing" independent of the mind's endless fabrications..

Is hubris and hypocrisy at their pinnacle: the amalgamation of assumptions and judgements working together to Again obscure the only reason we all ever stumbled upon...

This existence that we call X, Y, and Z!

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, Joshe said:

We can ask “what is it”. What is a thing, then identify as much as we can about the thing, including it’s similarities and differences that distinguish it from another thing. But if we were to put significant resources into making distinctions about every two similar things without discretion, that’d be a good way to squander life. 

I see some threads that I can tell contemplation is being done for contemplation’s sake, where people just want to play around for fun first, and they’re actually not interested in what is true because that would mean the theorizing would come to an end. Nothing wrong with that, but it is a trap that thinkers should be aware of. 

The distinction already includes how something differs from - and is similar to - other things. This and/or that. That is different from this. This is similar to that. Sometimes it's about refining the distinctions, becoming clearer as to what they are, so that we can better relate to them. For example, as you suggest, thinking isn't the same as contemplating. Failing to make fine distinctions usually leads to conflating - or "con-fusing" (fusing with) - things.

The act of distinguishing isn't limited to the intellect. I think you might be holding that notion. Every time you learn, you make a new distinction, or refine one you already had. So this process is directly related to learning new things.

Sure. On the other hand, what's true doesn't care about our obsession with - or requirement for - value or utility. It simply requires that something be true, at any level. Yet again, moving in this direction tends to empower learning and skill development.

I suppose that's part of the organic nature of groups of people coming together to investigate a subject. People contribute what they can, and the process is likely to be chaotic and messy - especially if the subject is inherently complex. Moreover, it's not always theorizing that's happening. The thread is more like a tool than a resolution to the problem. And of course, jokes, drama, and other extraneous things may also occur.

Edited August 19 by UnbornTao

[Joshe]

24 minutes ago, samijiben said:

Is hubris and hypocrisy at their pinnacle:

It's a function of moving forward, whether that be by solidifying one's identity or moving forward with practical matters, such as in business or basic life management. One would be paralyzed without making assumptions and judgements. They are necessary to move forward. To evolve. Even if they're wrong, there comes a time when one must move forward. 

[UnbornTao]

It seems to me you could ask what one is without having to necessarily bring up the other, at least in this case.

Edited August 19 by UnbornTao

[Sugarcoat]

If you really wanna get somewhere with contemplation instead of just staying at the mind level perhaps contemplate the mother of all assumptions which is that you’re real, and the world is real. That could potentially make you penetrate deeper into experience and actually change your experience, which I guess is the goal. Not only contemplate but actually bring your attention and focus to that sense of “I” 

[UnbornTao]

2 hours ago, Joshe said:

Yeah, it does seem like a good thing to contemplate, or at least mentally stimulating. 

Impartiality is a virtue that one cultivates. The impartial evaluation of evidence is a process aimed at arriving at what is true, but that process itself is not a judgement.

Maybe a judgement is a position taken based on the assessment. The position can be one of practicality and/or one of morality, but usually, probably both. 

We do it all the time. When Leo makes a judgement about something, he's asserting the findings and their implications of all the things he's carefully considered. It can be objective. If it couldn't be, the very word "objective" need not exist. 

The real gold would be in contemplating how to cultivate impartiality. 

For example, is "gravity is a principle" an objective claim? That sounds like an assertion of factual reality. In this sense, gravity is objective, or at least related to objects. A claim like "anger is historically based" may be factual, yet it doesn't seem to be objective, given it is about an emotion (although neither of these claims is necessarily a judgment, is it?).

Now, what if we claim "anger is an unwanted emotion"? That may be factual, non-objective (subjective), and judgment-based - not necessarily the claim itself, but the act of regarding anger as unwanted.

Leaving aside your own concerns and those of others, and observing a situation from an unbiased "third-person" perspective, as if you were detached, can go a long way toward being impartial - at least in moments where such quality is required. Learning to do this is, of course, the challenging part.

Just some raw considerations.

Edited August 19 by UnbornTao

[Joshe]

4 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

For example, is "gravity is a principle" an objective claim? That sounds like an assertion of factual reality. In this sense, gravity is objective, or at least related to objects. A claim like "anger is historically based" may be factual, yet it doesn't seem to be objective, given it is about an emotion (although neither of these claims is necessarily a judgment, is it?).

Now, what if we claim "anger is an unwanted emotion"? That may be factual, non-objective (subjective), and judgment-based - not necessarily the claim itself, but the act of regarding anger as unwanted.

Leaving aside your own concerns and those of others, and observing a situation from an unbiased "third-person" perspective, as if you were detached, can go a long way toward being impartial - at least in moments where such quality is required. Learning to do this is, of course, the challenging part.

Just some raw considerations.

An assumption can be a stepping stone toward a judgement, but it doesn't have to be. 

assumption → assessment → judgment

Assessment is where personal values and morality come into play. 

The point of a judgement is to move forward, out of perpetual assessment. "Given what I know, here's where I stand, and here's how I'll move forward". 

Regarding assumptions, we have to operate on assumptions because we don't have time to question them all. We'd be paralyzed by analysis. And even if we did, like if we questioned our assumption about gravity, that's not a very fruitful endeavor unless you're a philosopher or scientist. That is my judgement - based on my assessment.

Edited August 19 by Joshe

[UnbornTao]

13 hours ago, Joshe said:

An assumption can be a stepping stone toward a judgement, but it doesn't have to be. 

assumption → assessment → judgment

Assessment is where personal values and morality come into play. 

The point of a judgement is to move forward, out of perpetual assessment. "Given what I know, here's where I stand, and here's how I'll move forward". 

Regarding assumptions, we have to operate on assumptions because we don't have time to question them all. We'd be paralyzed by analysis. And even if we did, like if we questioned our assumption about gravity, that's not a very fruitful endeavor unless you're a philosopher or scientist. That is my judgement - based on my assessment.

Sounds good.

I'd add that you don't need judgment in order to act or make decisions; perhaps evaluation - assigning value - is what's required. Not everything is a judgment. All you need is intent, along with some other considerations based on that impulse, such as planning - depending on the action or process involved. For example, washing the dishes is quite straightforward, while writing a book requires more careful planning. Yet the particular actions performed to accomplish these tasks are guided by intent. Writing a book requires a more complex course of action, appropriately directed at that goal, and demands persistent effort. I'm not entirely sure what points I'm making here.

Yes, assumptions are a necessary convenience in many cases. I wouldn't call gravity an assumption - it is a principle, a "rule" of the physical world. Notice that how you relate to gravity influences every action you take. For anyone with a body, learning to better relate to this principle is essential for using the body more effectively. Athletes, for example, already refine their relationship with that principle in some fashion, even if they are unaware of it.

Still, the nature of assumptions is that they are hidden - we operate from them. So, the most profound ones for us are simply "reality" and "the way things are." I think you may be refering to more easily cognizable assumptions or beliefs. 

Edited August 20 by UnbornTao

[UnbornTao]

Actually, without the context of Value no assessment or judgment can take place.

Value is perhaps divided into good or bad, beneficial or threatening, positive or negative. What's regarded as neutral isn't recognized in our awareness or cognition. Has it been "pre-evaluated" as lacking value?

Edited August 21 by UnbornTao

[Joshe]

4 hours ago, UnbornTao said:

Actually, without the context of Value no assessment or judgment can take place.

Value is perhaps divided into good or bad, beneficial or threatening, positive or negative. What's regarded as neutral isn't recognized in our awareness or cognition. Has it been "pre-evaluated" as lacking value?

So what makes you get up to do the dishes? Maybe you value things being clean, tidy, or done, or maybe you fear your friends will think you’re a slob or you fear the dishes will pile up and bite you in the ass later. For some, it’s good to do the dishes - for others, bad. Even in the most trivial of things, we’re making judgements. 

What’s regarded as neutral can be and often is recognized in higher consciousness, but it’s almost always glossed over so we can get to the stuff that we think matters. It takes effort to force oneself to look at something they deem unimportant or less worthy of attention, because we all usually have something of our own that we place at the center, and we want others to acknowledge it and engage our center but we don’t want to engage the center of a grandma knitting sweaters. 

The grandma sees it as valuable, and so engages it. To me, I gloss right over it because I don’t care about knitting, but I do understand the grandma cares about it and it doesn’t go unnoticed. I judge her activity as unworthy of my time in a matter of milliseconds. Grandma knitting sweaters is neutral to me. But something like fishing, hunting, and watching sports - I see those as negative and I judge them as stupid and harmful wastes of time. 

If the grandma is nice and sweet and wants me to engage her about knitting, I will, because I like nice and sweet (judgement). But if she’s nasty, I will add that on top of my judgement of knitting and soon bounce. 

A very important thing to know is that judgements often happen in milliseconds because we’re pulling from previous assessments (cached data). I feel people need to be able to see this. You have to understand what 500ms is and how it differs from 1 second or 200ms. 

You can have Claude build you an artifact with 5 buttons, where each button opens a small popup at different speeds. There is significant difference in 50ms and 500ms, and the button popups can reveal it to you. 

Actually, I set it up so you can see: https://claude.ai/public/artifacts/d0f033db-aeb2-4e8f-abe5-cd06d240b269

Most people would gloss over this, but understanding the speed of psychic phenomena is crucial for understanding the mind.

If you pay attention to this and see what I’m saying, you can start to become aware of just how fast thoughts, judgements, and their implications occur, so that you can then contemplate the larger implications of it. 

Lastly, when we encounter something we’ve never seen before or never considered, we take time to form a judgement. We might judge the thing as potentially good for us but we don’t have time now to engage it, or we might judge that it is not for us at all, and the next time we encounter it, we quickly access our previous assessment and place our judgement. Some do this quicker than others but everyone does it, because they must. 

Imagine trying to navigate a bookstore without judgement. You must use judgement to find the books you're interested in, then you use discernment to figure out if you should buy the book. 

Without judgement, you're like a deer in headlights, not knowing what to do. The main role of judgement is to move forward. 

Maybe another good contemplation would be the distinction between judgement and discernment.

Edited August 21 by Joshe

[Joshe]

A lot of folks make a habit of skipping the discernment step (over-reliance on judgement), while others spend too much time there, burning time and energy out of fear of error or perfectionism. 

We need discernment about how much discernment is needed. Ideally, we can learn to judge accurately via discernment, and then rely on those sound judgements without getting bogged down in trying to discern everything there is, because there's simply not enough time.