setting +x on upload script

notes/against-method.md

@@ -27,6 +27,10 @@ In other words the theory itself is not free from the very thing that it describ
 > Almost everyone now agrees that what looks like a result of reason - the mastery of a language, the existence of a richly articulated
 perceptual world, logical ability - is due partly to indoctrination, partly a to a process of growth that proceeds with the force of natural low
 
+Not much to say other than I thought it was interesting how indoctrination is  used here in an almost innocent fashion.
+Indoctrination is used in conjunction with the phrase _due partly_ which seems as though the feeling is indoctrination is there but with its weight removed.
+Just before this part Feyerabend talk about error related to historical periods which seems rather fitting as imperceivable indoctrination could easily be part of this _historical error source_.
+
 
 ## Breaking the rules of classical epistemology
 
@@ -36,14 +40,46 @@ Hmm
 
 > Such violations are no accidental
 
-hmmmmmm
+Hmmmmmm
 
 > they are not the results of insufficient knowledge or of inattention which might have been avoided
 
-!
+Hmmmmmmmmm!
 
 > On the contrary, we see that they are necessary for progress
 
-Proress in this case really means "knowledge".
+Progress in this case really means "knowledge".
 I'm choosing to interpret this using Bloom's method of describing understanding. New discoveries don't always give us comprehensions as we've really only uncovered an apparant fact.
 Comprehension, understanding, and intuition come later after some time.
+
+So we see that in order to progress scientific knowledge that it is necessary to break from traditional methods and embrace that which traditional processes often deem incorrect.
+
+Memes aside this reads similar to the colloquialism that goes something like: _use the right tool for the job_.
+Following this casual logic we could prescribe traditional scientific method(a process) analogous to some kind of tool, which implies there are specific uses for it.
+
+## Counterinduction 1: Theories
+
+Cool points that are made in this section:
+
+> Progressive educators have always tried to develop the individuality of their pupils, and to bring to fruition the particular and sometimes quite unique talents and beliefs that each child possesses
+
+To this end I see that creativity in the pursuit of solutions flourishes most when students are given constraints.
+One of the fundamental issues with finding solutions to problems is finding the appropriate question to ask which allows the creative part of ourselves to make connections between the problem and the question being asked.
+Those connections and the process of establishing premises around the convenience, feasibility, and effectiveness of those connections is what facilitates the derivation of a solution.
+
+Simply said: if you can ask a good enough question then creativity can flourish in the space of that question. Then it is sufficient to understand how we ask questions.
+
+## Asking questions is both Restrictive and Freeing
+
+### It give us a reason to move
+
+I say this because through out the course of this essay there is a sentiment which I personally don't agree with _(bad paraphrasing incoming)_:
+
+> A process of learning free of restrictions is also free of restriction of thought
+
+On paper yes, this is probably how things should work, however: as irrational a person may be we are still wrapped in this logical, rational body of a human.
+This is to say that while we may be able to conjure great theories without restrictions in practice many freeze at the thought of having no restrictions to a solution.
+
+A question regarding a problem gives us context; a problem space.
+Even if we are trying to derive some new kind of knowledge from what may seem like the ether before we arrive at an uncharted logical destination we must at least generate some set of problems spaces, in order to align a direction of solution.
+