Metrics to evaluate when considering an opinion or direction's likelihood of generating well-being:
Can it be articulated coherently?
Is it self-referential or other-referential?
Does the position move things closer to balance in the context in which it is suggested?
Is it a direct answer to the question: "What is healthy and optimal for all people involved?"
Is it sustainable if everyone has free will and sees the full picture?
Does it have a measurable cost benefit that is spelled out?
Would the person making an argument volunteer to occupy all sides of the position they are recommending?
Are their sources for every "facts?"
Is the potential of being right bigger than the downside potential of being wrong?
Does the person opposing a position have a clear alternative?
What is the level of expertise of the person specific to the idea?
Does the person care about the issue enough to sit down and articulate the issue in all nuances on camera?
Submit
Should be Empty:
Now create your own JotForm - It's free!
Create your own JotForm