on 'a priori'

Sometimes I wonder about the terms a priori and a posteriori,  both of which stands originally for the philosophical term created by Immanuel Kant (and I believe it is in Critique of the Pure Reason).

To describe my personal experience with regard to these terms, I tend to rely on a priori,  which could diminish the original meaning of the term but if it is paraphrased as 'the insight/conclusion induced from any sort of reasoning, irrelevant to the knowledge or experience', then it can be articulated that I relied too much on a priori and underestimated a posteriori. 

For instance as a developer, in several startups (it is almost more than several years ago but), I was totally immature such that read a few technical books (mainly read ordinary books. though) and thought I could get over any complicated issues. One of my biggest sin is I did not spend my private time learning tech stuff, indifferent to the news or politics (or had interest in really limited or skewed way), though was overly confident that 'I can conclude/decide anything'. So in short I judged things which i didn't have any idea. This was totally ignorance, yet could be taken as sort of a priori,  since the engine or mindset to make me conclude things on any subject, whether it is technical stuff or not, was coming from the logics or anything I got in my university education.

I knew how to reason.

It made me much better than the people who judges things or people with poor reasoning skills, but still this a priori caused harm on my intelligence and therefore, my productivity as well. Though I learned a lot about coding, and its philosophy, devops things, part of Haskell(purescript),  Unix, GPG, et cetra, my learning curve presumably looked poor and I could blame myself that time. I always felt anxious, feel inferior, compared with the hacker kids or genious I worked with who are much much younger than me, also, in Hacker News meetups or any international dev meetings, my lack of knowledge on any tech subjects (or more business level) elicited contempt from anyone I met with.

I was really immature at those days. Partially it was, at that time in my mindset the notion that 'I wanted to be an artist(cartoonist). This is not my job. I, since my childhood was not good at understanding people's conversation and language processing, I drew pics and created music, so this job is not what I really wanted to do...' or any kind of excuse to justify my current misery. Yet, most of the time it did not work. As of now, I am confident in my developer skills as well as that of art. If any of you who is not confident in their performance, if you keep doing it and suffer enough, you definitely can get skill.

Of course, in my almost decade developer career, I saw tons of incompetent workers. But let me skip the precise description on them since it is off the topic, but it meant (at least I observe) I functioned well. I finished a lot of big projects. 

So in most of the cases, we do not need to humiliate ourselves but still, the undermining the importance of  `knowledge` is fatal to your productivity and also the QOL. Except in some really exceptional cases in which community anyone arounds you accepts who you are with who you are, usually you are judged by your ability, skills, or the ability to exaggerate your value. Usually most of the incompetent guys achieve this goal by humiliating/threatening others. (I saw many of these people in my decade career).

So the survival strategy, almost in 90% of the cases is how much you spent your time studying new things. Books are the easiest way to achieve the credible sources, rather than that of the Internet since Internet is the aggregation of fractions of trustworthy and untrustworthy data, the way how these comes into your sight is not according to how worthy/qualitative these information is, but how you are targeted by the vicious corporations (something like the crappy YouTube commercial (esp. in Japan) trying to sell you the garbage books written by garbage authors promoted by garbage people contaminates the Internet platform so in the totalitarian regime they should be absolutely executed for the public good) and economical gain, supported by the platform which don't give any shit about the benefit of users.

So, in the 21st century, the intelligence relies on a priori is almost a sin, and you can be ignorant person being exploited by corporation, with the digital profiling backed by machine learning algorithms.

We need more `a posteriori`, need more diverse `credible` sources, need to contact and communicate groups of people before alienating and antagonizing them, need to collect (non twisted) multiple data to conclude or have any opinion on anything.

In any gigantic online platforms, such as YouTube, Facebook Twitter, 4CH, Yahoo news's comments, you see tons of  retarded people speak out nonsense discloses how they don't learned things in their entire life. And people who does not deserve to speak out also have an opportunity to speak out, which caused so many online bullying such as Hana Kimura's suicidal death, even though partially it was the responsibility of the media who agitated, but the online platform must not allow non intelligent people have effect on others, which is not good for the public. (It is toxic and devastating).

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jan 20 is the historical day that online gang-banging to brainwash the people does not work. Mostly we saw that many crappy a-priori combined with reek a-posteriori amplified and spread fake news drove Q-Anon or any other idiots to try insurgencies, as Russia wanted, failed.

Hope democrats to tackle with especially on global warming, stopping `egoism` pandemic which can agitate the third world war. Discrediting Joe Biden campaign ended with the miserable failure. Rest in Peace FOX news, and the alt right's acclaim that `Hey, liberals are hypocrite` does not work since justifying sabotage on Paris Treaty or racism is 100 times worse than hypocrisy.