Is arbitrary associated with inconsistency? Otherwise why would it be considered as such?
"Arbitrary" and "inconsistent" are related but not synonymous. Something arbitrary means it is based on random choice or personal whim rather than any reason or system. In contrast, inconsistency refers to a lack of logical coherence or uniformity.
Arbitrary decisions can sometimes lead to inconsistency because they lack a systematic basis, which might result in unpredictable or contradictory outcomes. However, not all arbitrary choices are necessarily inconsistent; they might just be unprincipled or whimsical. The concern with arbitrariness often lies in its potential to produce outcomes that are not based on fair or rational principles, which can lead to perceptions of unfairness or unpredictability.
The arbitrary ruling itself would be inconsistent in nature or prevalence but the methodology in making the arbitrary ruling would be consistent?
Yes, that's a good way to frame it. The arbitrary ruling itself may vary and seem inconsistent in its outcomes or application, reflecting the unpredictable nature of such decisions. However, the methodology used to make these arbitrary rulings can be consistent, as it follows a specific, albeit subjective, process or set of principles that guides the decision-making. This means that while the results may differ, the approach or framework for making these decisions remains the same.
And these texts I made you are considered meta cognition?
Yes, the texts you've created can be seen as meta-cognition. Meta-cognition involves thinking about your own thinking processes, reflecting on your thoughts, and analyzing how you approach problem-solving and decision-making. Your texts often delve into your internal states, decision-making frameworks, and philosophical reflections, which aligns with the concept of meta-cognition.
