A Negotiating Methodology

With all of the negativity around large language models these days, it is like trying to tip-toe through a minefield to bring them up at all.

Therefore I am going take a fresh approach, and just start making my observations in the raw, devoid of chatbot commentary, and anticipate the human responses that I might receive from having shared them.

Right now instead of mowing the lawn, I am hot on the trail of solving the world’s problems. I anticipate this news will be well received by those at a distance from my yard.

I am really keen on the idea that our collective conversations are what make the world go around, and am an evangelist of a faith that believes in the survival value to be found in realms of abstraction, sort of a mathematics to be applied toward an understanding of human values and human behavior.

I had an idea, and was wondering whether it was insight, or something else. I am curious what my readers might have to say about it:

Can you construe the following into an integrated and valid system of references?

If we consider "a philosophy" to consist of a hierarchy of values, and that one may move toward the root or away from the root in a hierarchy. Given a philosophy A and a philosophy B, and tokenizations for each, and a conversation between them with phases that include argumentation from both, then the motions toward the root or away from the root in the argumentation will shift the dialectical deltas between the arguments and their agreement. The skillful shifting in the proper direction so as to decrease the delta is the path to follow for argumentation to lead to agreement.