@givemersspls: Ouuhh...I did not want to offend you or anything. I am awfully sorry, if my reply sounded rude. That was not my intention.
I only mentioned the child-game example to emphasize on how fundamental and deeply rooted that search for a reason is in us human. (Because even children begin to ask those questions and we don't stop when have grown up.) I didn't want to make short of anyone with it. I believe "the search for the Origin" is a better name for it.
I fear I also didn't elaborate on the "the judges are the oldest and basta" point enough. In that example on how to pick a judge for a tribal leader election I should have written, "They simply pick the oldest people around. Those don't have to be the wisest, most knowledgeable or even fair people around, but because of their age chances are good, they are indeed the people with the highest share of those qualities around. So it might become a general rule, because it would be tedious to look into every person to find a judge/the judges, as everyone has a skeleton hidden in the closet. Therefore it becomes a general rule most concur with at some point and therefore then "Basta!", even if it might not the a fool-prove method."
When I read your "How are the judges picked?" post, I got the impression, that in the way, it has been formulated (not necessarily intended on your part), it strongly implies to look into finding a satisfactory solution, but
without drawing a line, when to stop and settle for one solution. That really looked very idealistic to me, so I couldn't help myself and wanted to pick up that point.
For me it seems we differ on the point, what is more idealistic. "The quest for a very simple solution to a problem & the believe, that those solutions will work out in most cases." or "The quest for a nearly optimal solution to a problem & and the believe, that those are nearly always worth the work to find those." And meanwhile we both think, we are advocates of "The search for the best possible solution to a problem." 🤣 Neither of us is looking for "the simplest of all" or "the perfect" solution. I reckon we are even on quite similar grounds. "One should put in effort in looking for a solution that works good, while not losing oneself in the details, that aren't worth it."
The
"Welp, can't be helped. Just pick what superficially makes the most sense! It will work just fine." and
"But we have to really, really look into this matter, to make sure everyone can concur on that." positions are both extreme and naive. I also strongly believe we are on common ground with that.
I really hope, I didn't darken your mood too much yesterday and that this post here makes up for it a bit.
Actually, I'd like to see me as an idealist, but I fear a already strayed to far from that point. Though I began to see, that people, who are pragmatists, won't be able to save the world and only a people with their foots not on the ground won't be stuck in that swamp, we've created to keep us from saving ourselves. If I am a idealistic believer, so be it. (That'd be nice and at least I'm not a belieber.)