Common sense is anchor

We live, love, and learn by metaphor. ‘Common sense is anchor’ is, I am convinced, a useful metaphor for learning.

In what sense is common sense an anchor?

An anchor keeps us steady when we just want to lie on deck either sleeping or day-dreaming. It keeps us safely anchored in place. It is our security. If we put one out fore and aft we cannot move without a great force compelling us to move.

However, the anchor functions as security only in shallow water.

To go to sea, to explore, to discover the adventure of the deep water and distant shores one must ‘up anchor’, one must dislodge the anchor from solid ground and take a leap of faith, we must learn to develop confidence in our instincts and to navigate by the stars. It entails risk; but what form of action can we indulge our self in if we remain at anchor?

All of this is just to set the stage for stating my conviction that we must put on hold our common sense while we explore a new domain of knowledge. I am not talking about what happens in school where the teacher takes us by the hand and shows us charts and maps about other lands wherein we never leave anchor. I am talking about what we must do when our school days are over and we wish to find a new means to reach another intellectual domain.

We must place on hold our common sense while exploring new domains of knowledge until we have gained sufficient knowledge about these new domains to make good judgments. Of course, this requires that we do ‘due diligence’ when choosing our maps and charts before we set out. Seek out the best minds as your guide when entering a new domain of knowledge and then up anchor for a voyage of discovery.

Quantum Theory and Psychology are two examples of domains of knowledge that cannot possibly be explored while clutching a security blanket.

Do you think ‘common sense is anchor’ is a valid metaphor?

Have you ever explored a new domain of knowledge without a teacher at your side?

Do you think ‘common sense is anchor’ is a valid metaphor?

Yes, it is. But a platform or foundation to build upon would be even better.

Have you ever explored a new domain of knowledge without a teacher at your side?

Many, many times in my 60+ years. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've ventured into totally strange waters without taking a guide along.

But I'm afraid your idea is totally invalid. No one should ever abandon their common sense for any purpose whatsoever! I do understand what you're saying but you're not really talking about common sense at all. What you've described leaving behind or "on hold" is actually preconceived notions and bias, not your common sense at all.

That "anchor" can also lead us to staying where we find to be the most comfortable and therefore hold us back like a dead weight in trying to find out the many more things that make life interesting.

Yes, it is. But a platform or foundation to build upon would be even better.



Many, many times in my 60+ years. I cannot even begin to count the number of times I've ventured into totally strange waters without taking a guide along.

But I'm afraid your idea is totally invalid. No one should ever abandon their common sense for any purpose whatsoever! I do understand what you're saying but you're not really talking about common sense at all. What you've described leaving behind or "on hold" is actually preconceived notions and bias, not your common sense at all.

I suspect that if you were to study Quantum Theory and Psychology you would change your mind. I am new to psychology but I have tried to enlighten others about some of the fundamental ideas and I constantly find their attitude to be negative and they give their common sense view of reality as their argument. I am convinced this is a universal problem and is quite harmful to learning by adults.

I suspect that if you were to study Quantum Theory and Psychology you would change your mind. I am new to psychology but I have tried to enlighten others about some of the fundamental ideas and I constantly find their attitude to be negative and they give their common sense view of reality as their argument. I am convinced this is a universal problem and is quite harmful to learning by adults.

I already have studied both. Four years of psychology, in fact (and it doesn't need to be capitalized). I saw no conflicts with common knowledge, just dropping preconceived ideas as I said earlier and learning from a slightly different viewpoint. The particular "others" you're talking about either can't or didn't drop their bias.

You do understand what I mean by preconceived ideas and bias, don't you?

Read-Only

I would define common sense as being the intuition one has of the world, it is the world view that a person has at the point in time. That world view includes all the ideas, biases, and values that the person has accumulated in his or her life and all of it affects their perceptions and conceptions as they move forward in time.

When I ask a person to put that common sense on hold I recognize that they cannot be totally successful but that they can be partially successful.

Perhaps your study of psychology did not require you to suspend your common sense but I had to and every time I try to post about what I have learned I discover that no one can accept what psychology says is true because that truth is contrary to their common sense.

Common Sense is just that - "common". It is the practical skills and knowledge most people have learned in living. There is a big difference between a person of common sense and an intellectual. The intellectual uses abstraction to explore knowledge without a tie to practical use in society. Indeed, common sense will hinder the pursuit of intellectual knowledge. Clearly, as many great intellectuals have contributed to society without their pursuits being of immediate practical value, abandoning common sense can be extremely useful in developing one's knowledge. Nevertheless, common sense is a highly practical tool for engineering reality.

Read-Only

I would define common sense as being the intuition one has of the world, it is the world view that a person has at the point in time. That world view includes all the ideas, biases, and values that the person has accumulated in his or her life and all of it affects their perceptions and conceptions as they move forward in time.

When I ask a person to put that common sense on hold I recognize that they cannot be totally successful but that they can be partially successful.

Perhaps your study of psychology did not require you to suspend your common sense but I had to and every time I try to post about what I have learned I discover that no one can accept what psychology says is true because that truth is contrary to their common sense.

Coberst, I approached psychology in the exact same was as I did chemistry, physics and other subjects. With the understanding that I was entering an entirely new realm with it's own set of rules and truths. And just as it is with all things, the more you study the more those truths become self-evident.

But what you say is true, many people just cannot do that - they want the truth/facts to fit THEIR vision of things and that's exactly why so many of them never fully learn the subjects they study. They continue to resist until the very end.

In fact, you and I are engaged in a form of psychological debate ourselves on the topic of 'common sense.' :) We see it quite differently and my view is based on clinical training and personal experiences with people covering a span of over a half-century. I see common sense as being the practical approach to life - things like getting out of the rain, eating when hungry, not repeating the same mistakes over and over, paying your bills to stay out of trouble, not walking around trying to pick a fight with everyone you meet, etc., etc.

But the things you are describing do not fit into that neat little category. Rather, they are the prejudices and desires that people develop along with the insistence of having things work the way THEY want them to work - regardless of evidence to the contrary. They never succeed, of course, and that frustration drives them even deeper into their shells of comfort where things DO go the way they want them to. I find that to be quite different when compared to common sense. I will agree that they are related in rather loose fashion yet they are still separate and distinct things.

Coberst, I approached psychology in the exact same was as I did chemistry, physics and other subjects. With the understanding that I was entering an entirely new realm with it's own set of rules and truths. And just as it is with all things, the more you study the more those truths become self-evident.

But what you say is true, many people just cannot do that - they want the truth/facts to fit THEIR vision of things and that's exactly why so many of them never fully learn the subjects they study. They continue to resist until the very end.

In fact, you and I are engaged in a form of psychological debate ourselves on the topic of 'common sense.' :) We see it quite differently and my view is based on clinical training and personal experiences with people covering a span of over a half-century. I see common sense as being the practical approach to life - things like getting out of the rain, eating when hungry, not repeating the same mistakes over and over, paying your bills to stay out of trouble, not walking around trying to pick a fight with everyone you meet, etc., etc.

But the things you are describing do not fit into that neat little category. Rather, they are the prejudices and desires that people develop along with the insistence of having things work the way THEY want them to work - regardless of evidence to the contrary. They never succeed, of course, and that frustration drives them even deeper into their shells of comfort where things DO go the way they want them to. I find that to be quite different when compared to common sense. I will agree that they are related in rather loose fashion yet they are still separate and distinct things.

Exactly. I have the same views on this.

Exactly. I have the same views on this.

Thank you, Klippy. :) It's quite clear, isn't it?

Both of you are clear, and I agree with you both. The differences in semantics are trivial.

Both of you are clear, and I agree with you both. The differences in semantics are trivial.

I can agree and live with that. ;)

Both of you are clear, and I agree with you both. The differences in semantics are trivial.


I agree. We are quibbling around the semantic edges about a concept that is not very clear to anyone.