Honestly I don't find that process hard because I will not allow myself to live in a state of cognitive dissonance - conflicts in logic MUST be resolved. If there is no epistemic resolution possible, then we have nothing to say about this question with any degree of certainty. We can literally ignore all other information that claims to resolve it because we are not smart enough to actually define the problem.
For example we can make no certain conclusions on the "Hard question of consciousness." As a result there is nothing concrete about the concept of consciousness because it's not even a well defined enough question. Anyone attempting to make a claim are making it in an epistemic vacuum. So it doesn't matter who is talking about it, the state of knowledge of the concept of "consciousness" is so lacking that it doesn't even make sense to discuss.
In my view most of the persistent problems in humanity are in this class: we haven't defined measurements for the issue in question well enough to actually be able to approach a solution.
I always keep in mind that: "I'm probably wrong about my position"
If you are seeking data to confirm your idea then you'll be wrong more often than not
If you are seeking data to falsify your idea then you'll be less wrong more often
For example we can make no certain conclusions on the "Hard question of consciousness." As a result there is nothing concrete about the concept of consciousness because it's not even a well defined enough question. Anyone attempting to make a claim are making it in an epistemic vacuum. So it doesn't matter who is talking about it, the state of knowledge of the concept of "consciousness" is so lacking that it doesn't even make sense to discuss.
In my view most of the persistent problems in humanity are in this class: we haven't defined measurements for the issue in question well enough to actually be able to approach a solution.
I always keep in mind that: "I'm probably wrong about my position"
If you are seeking data to confirm your idea then you'll be wrong more often than not
If you are seeking data to falsify your idea then you'll be less wrong more often