The problem with philosophy is that there are endless amounts of problems. And if every single problem could be universalized, then all problems would be solved. It may sound like a straightforward judgment but its not.
I find that problems are everywhere. Wherever there is friction, there is opportunity to overcome it.
Let’s also presuppose that “claims I make are simple at first glance, but there are always deeper implications.”
I don’t need to think too hard about, nor do you; however which way outside forces interrupt agency, a problem arises. So we could assume as a fundamental idea that problems and challenges occur in spite of one’s agency. The same could be said if WE cause an interruption; if another person feels it’s effects while unaware, that becomes a problem for them. So we could also assume that problems are formed from a lack of understanding, from a lack of anticipation or awareness, and always from an outer cause. The immediate instance for a lack of control is an immediate predicate, and we begin to analyze from there.
Our nature wants us to solve these problems immediately and without residue, but that may not always be possible. In most cases, we take lessons from those who came before us, who have figured out those solutions.
The question then becomes: Must there always be a clear and efficient solution? What if something that worked before no longer fits within a changed system? Perhaps solutions that worked before can no longer apply due to periods of change.
So I need to figure out a means for identifying problems at an attempt at “universality” in spite of it being impossible.
In a world that is saturated with needless and excessive problems, human adaptation may be categorically different from what I’m proposing; I need to believe that old problems may be vanquished by new sets of perspectives and means.
This is why method is more important than mere outcome; desirable outcomes may occur from strokes of luck, but method attempts at consistency.
Casemapp: Media 
Leave a comment