bloatware-site
TOC ⌄
Philosophy 2: The Research MethodologyWhy These Three?What is Calibration?The "Read Everything" FallacyResearch Methodology
SeriesPart 03 / 04 of series Philosophy 2

# Philosophy 2: The Research Methodology§

In my last [post: Finding Purpose](../../09/philosophy-2-finding-purpose/index.html), I explored the idea of escaping the paralysis loop by choosing a provisional map - selecting a temporary purpose. But once deciding to move forward, a new problem appears: What tools do I pack for the road trip?

If the ultimate end goal is understanding the self, my hobbies and pursuits cannot simply be random. After wrestling with this in my mind, I settled on three temporary purposes to guide my current phase: Philosophy, Linguistics, and Social Engineering.

## Why These Three?§

They might look disconnected at first glance, but under the hood, they form a tight feedback loop that emerged naturally from questioning:

Each of these serves the same vector: understanding the self.

## What is Calibration?§

Reviewing my own past posts, writing purely from internal thoughts is essentially driving a car with blindfolds. Movement happens, sure, but without external reference points, there is no way to check when the vehicle heads off a cliff.

This is where **calibration** becomes essential.

Surely, I am not the first person to think about these things. Millennia of thinkers, practitioners, and sages have walked this road and left behind written records. Reading prior literature acts as a calibration mechanism. It serves as a mirror to test whether internal reasoning holds, where blind spots lie, and what possibilities were missed.

## The "Read Everything" Fallacy§

Opening the door to human literature, however, immediately brings back an old enemy of mine: **extremism**.

Deciding to study philosophy and linguistics instantly places one at the edge of a seemingly infinite library containing tens of millions of books. My extremist mindset immediately tries to set a trap: "How can I know if a book or a philosophy is worth reading unless I have read everything first?"

It functions as a psychological excuse because the threshold of reading everything is mathematically impossible ...

## Research Methodology§

Staring at this exhaustion, my mind drifts back to a simple course taken during university days: Introduction to Research Methodology.

In formal academic research, nobody just wanders into a lab and starts mixing random chemicals because they look shiny. Instead, a strict pipeline guides the process:

  1. 1. Define the core research problem (for me: understanding the self).
  2. 2. Gather initial baseline observations or knowledge (my early random posts).
  3. 3. Conduct a targeted literature survey using reliable sources.
  4. 4. Identify literature gaps and unanswered questions.
  5. 5. Determine which problem state is worth exploring further.
  6. 6. Formulate the problem statement.
  7. 7. Conduct appropriate surveys and experiments.
  8. 8. Record the observations and future scope.

Viewing the search for the self through this lens is important. There is no need to read everything in existence. The current stage simply represents the literature survey phase of a long-term research project.

Just like an academic researcher evaluates the reputation of a journal through peer review and citation indices, how do I evaluate the reputation of a philosophical text? That is the next question I need to work on ...

---