being a bit wrong, again

Is it characteristic of human action that it must always be based on incomplete knowledge - and is therefore always on a continuum of possible error?

Is this so obvious that it almost need not be said. Yet in not saying it are there some that don’t realise? I think in doing things I often am not clear on it myself. Can everyone else ignore it without ignoring that they are ignoring it? (I doubt that.) In many ways I might ask ‘does it matter?’, at least in my day to day.

We now seem to have some correct answers - sometimes about things that were entirely invisible to our ancestors - but I wonder, does accepting those things and their rightness make us more open to accepting things that may not be as easily proven, but may be told behind masks that suggest it is? Do we all have various degrees of clarity about this too, in a world speaking on such terms, does it make us all vulnerable to mistake, tending either towards sitting behind masks of knowing or of being vulnerable to them from others who seem like they know? Have easy processes of turning on a light, washing clothes in a machine, many others, have they made us less aware sometimes of difficulty in simple things? More impatient when we don’t get an answer that lets us go on (to more things that will open up to us with the aid of technology?)

Is saying such things itself a mark of naivety?

In addition does it look like being slow when everything else is eased into going faster and apparently smoothly?

In a sense is this not all obvious, yet often curiously hidden? A sort of thinking through from basics that many may say ‘yes, we know’ and shrug off - some bearing it in mind a lot and others not, some losing track of it.

Is it also about how far we choose to look into something. If I turn a light on maybe understandably I don’t remind myself of the history of lighting and the problems solved to give me an LED bulb. But sometimes I think that we might get the balance, of how far we look at something, wrong. Sometimes allowing other things to get in the way of looking at it more fully, sometimes to get a more convenient answer. Perhaps to get one that challenges some of our own thinking less, some of our own fundamentals, the basis on which we act. Sometimes I wonder if our more developed world, with us perhaps more specialist within it, leaves us acting in such ways until we come to a clash with another way, on its own path. Or is that just my speculation? I must be a bit wrong?

Toni