David Bohm’s On Dialogue is relevant because he gives us a protocol for communication that resolves conflicting perspective. Here we can note in regard to the Bitcoin’s block size debate, much of the infighting happens because each side of the debate is using different definitions for key words.
This can be alleviated, simply by calling attention to it. Each party can still keep their definitions, but the confusion and perpetual conflict is lifted when everyone understands the cause of it.
This speaks to John Nash’s Ideal Money which is very much misunderstood.
Here we can think of how people want to blame Chinese regulation for a drop in the bitcoin price.
If we think of a theoretical stable metric of value in relation to bitcoin, the usd, and the yuan, when the price of bitcoin drops in relation to both the usd and the yuan, its NOT necessarily so that it also drops in value in relation to our conceptual stable metric.
This is the meaning of ideal, conceptual. Ideal Money is a device to insert in dialogue that allows us to properly have this conversation. Without it there is no way to sort out the fragmented perspectives, and so people are probably confused.
That is why the introduction of a stable metric of value into the block size debate is big blocker Kryptonite.
It’s also why I am banned from r/btc by Roger Ver and why the media he controls won’t talk about Nash’s lectures.