What is a Framework and System of Knowledge?

[Veritas Aequitas]

The above logic is applicable to every beliefs and methodology but yet humanity has progress since humans first emerged.

My Morality-Proper FSK would be grounded on critical thinking and what is generally accepted as rationality plus wisdom.
Obviously there is no God to decide on an absolute answer, but my Morality-Proper FSK will be as close as the credibility and objectivity.
Despite theistic dogmatism, it is evident the scientific FSERK has a trend of positive progress and my Morality-Proper FSK will ride on that trend.

But there is an ultimate decider. For what counts as rationality and non-rationality; what counts as wisdom and non-wisdom.

What counts as progress and what counts as regress.
What counts as Morality Proper and Morlaity non-Proper.

You are going in circles. Not much wisdom in that.

A theist can assert everything you've asserted without wasting their life doing it. Why? Because reasons.

The end.

As I threw it to Godelian,
say, if you must have a brain surgery, who would you chose?
1. A science-based certified qualified brain surgeon or
2. The shaman or an unqualified doctor down the road.

Being a rational person of average intelligence and knowledge, it is likely you [or anyone of your status] will opt for 1, but WHY?? sixth-sense, guessing??
What is implied in the above decision is a FSK, critical thinking, rationality and wisdom at play.
It is not done at present and I am making the implied explicit and to ensure it is a norm in the future.
What I propose is a hypothesis which I am optimistic is tenable in the future.

You can resist my proposals but that would be resisting progress for humanity in the future.

[Skepdick]

if you must have a brain surgery, who would you chose?

How would you even decide whether you must; or mustn't have a brain surgery?

[godelian]

1.Where did computers come from if not created by humans?
2. Where did the OS and Softwares programs grounded on numbers and the binary system come from if not from humans?
3. Where did the numbers and binary from humans come from?
4. There are traceable and reducible to our human origins via adaptations re evolutions since eons ago.

It is not just that you do not make use of the scientific method to justify your propositions. You do not make use of any justification whatsoever. So, computers are a product of evolution? So, humans somehow became computers?

[Veritas Aequitas]

1.Where did computers come from if not created by humans?
2. Where did the OS and Softwares programs grounded on numbers and the binary system come from if not from humans?
3. Where did the numbers and binary from humans come from?
4. There are traceable and reducible to our human origins via adaptations re evolutions since eons ago.

It is not just that you do not make use of the scientific method to justify your propositions. You do not make use of any justification whatsoever. So, computers are a product of evolution? So, humans somehow became computers?

Yours is a strawman.
Something seem to be wrong with your cognitive powers?
Here, [with AI assistance] my response to your above:

My thesis above does not claim that 'humans became computers. That interpretation is a misrepresentation of my argument, which focuses on the traceable origins of numerical systems and patterns.

Clarification of My Thesis: I argue that numbers, patterns, and the binary system—foundational to computer science—are rooted in biological and psychological adaptations of humans, such as counting fingers and recognizing patterns. These abilities evolved over time and were later abstracted into mathematical systems by humans.

How Computers Fit In: Computers are tools created by humans. They operate on mathematical principles, such as binary logic, which humans abstracted from earlier numerical and pattern-recognition abilities. These tools reflect our capacity to externalize and automate processes derived from these foundational skills.

Why This Isn't Saying 'Humans Became Computers': My argument is about the origin of the concepts (numbers, binary, etc.), not the nature of humans.
Saying computers are products of human creativity and evolution is not the same as saying humans 'became computers.'
That misrepresents my point and creates a strawman argument.

[godelian]

Saying computers are products of human creativity and evolution is not the same as saying humans 'became computers.'

Evolution is about one species evolving out of another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Evolution is the change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.[1][2]

In what way are computers a heritable characteristic of humans?

Computers have been around for less than a century. Evolution of biological populations is not even noticeable over just a century.

[Veritas Aequitas]

Saying computers are products of human creativity and evolution is not the same as saying humans 'became computers.'

Evolution is about one species evolving out of another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Evolution is the change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.[1][2]

In what way are computers a heritable characteristic of humans?

Computers have been around for less than a century. Evolution of biological populations is not even noticeable over just a century.

Word Salad

[godelian]

Saying computers are products of human creativity and evolution is not the same as saying humans 'became computers.'

Evolution is about one species evolving out of another:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evolution

Evolution is the change in the heritable characteristics of biological populations over successive generations.[1][2]

In what way are computers a heritable characteristic of humans?

Computers have been around for less than a century. Evolution of biological populations is not even noticeable over just a century.

Word Salad

The idea that "computers are products of ... evolution" is clearly a mischaracterization. Computers are not a biological population subject to change in their heritable characteristics.

[Veritas Aequitas]

if you must have a brain surgery, who would you chose?

How would you even decide whether you must; or mustn't have a brain surgery?

Brain surgery is just one example.

In our present modern times, a patient will seek advise from a GP or a specialist who in his opinion will advise the patient of what is needed critically, e.g. brain surgery and other medical solutions.
There are many cases, where the patients also has access to their traditional doctors or are influenced by family, kin & friends to seek alternatives and many patients has opted for the traditional non-scientific based options.

[Skepdick]

if you must have a brain surgery, who would you chose?

How would you even decide whether you must; or mustn't have a brain surgery?

Brain surgery is just one example.

In our present modern times, a patient will seek advise from a GP or a specialist who in his opinion will advise the patient of what is needed critically, e.g. brain surgery and other medical solutions.
There are many cases, where the patients also has access to their traditional doctors or are influenced by family, kin & friends to seek alternatives and many patients has opted for the traditional non-scientific based options.

Solutions?

What FSK are you using to distinguish a problem from a non-problem?