“Curt. I don’t understand the connection between science and “common empirical l

—“Curt. I don’t understand the connection between science and “common empirical law”. Can you explain?”—

Sure.

CONTEXT

English for example consists of three languages: german for the farmers and workers, french for the ruling class, and latin for the intellectual classes. That’s why its hard to understand english: it’s ‘not conflated’. It’s a class based langauge for a class based civilization.

Similarly, Westerners do not conflate

– Science,

– Law,

– Philosophy,

– Religion,

– Festival.

Instead, each of these disciplines reflects the interests of the classes:

– intellectual/scientific,

– ruling/martial,

– middle/commercial,

– working/family, and

– sport/mating/youth/children.

Because of this non-conflation, westerners are essentially polytheistic – but each class both speaks in a language of its own, and makes use of the ‘theisms’ of whatever classes they participate in. (hence the decline in religion for self-centric families and retention of it for family-centric families).

Because we have been practicing “Market (commercial) Society” for so long, and because we have been outbreeding and are largely homogenous outside of the lower Mediterranean, its hard to see the caste system in the west. But it’s present everywhere OUTSIDE of the “Market” (commerce).

Communism, Socialism and tehir current incarnation as Democratic Secular Humanism are all simply attempts to exploit market society and to destroy the aristocratic (caste) system. So this dominates our state, academy, school, and media. Meanwhile the ‘conservatives’ resist this change in various ways – more successfully than their European counterparts.

NOW THAT WE HAVE A LITTLE CONTEXT, LET US RETURN TO YOUR QUESTION

Aristocracy was imposed on the west by the Yamna (Aryans). And these people had already invented contractualism – out of necessity. And had already developed testimonial ism – the predecessor to empiricism. These are big words but they simply mean that they did not speak in theoretical terms, because martial epistemology is very unforgiving. So they treated all speech as ‘oath’, not ‘teaching’ or ‘sharing’. (I am trying to illustrate the cultural difference because for some cultures this kind of truthfulness in public is hard to comprehend.)

So these warriors, each of whom functioned as a business owner, debated, and used juries (thangs) of different sizes, rather than dictates from rulers to decide community issues.

The greeks maintained this combination of martial epistemology, and testimony, and debate. ANd this is why they were able to extend that process into their reason, and then into primitive science. (Aristotle’s study of constitutions for example). And we see the same in Machiavelli (inventor of political science), and we see the same in Bacon (inventor of empiricism), and of course, bacon plus literacy broke the curse of conflationary Christian mysticism – albeit slowly – creating all manner of sectarian fundamentalism, until we reach darwin and maxwell which end the church’s mysticism and mysticism’s use in our political life forever.

So the fact is that westerners have been ’empirical’ into pre-history for reasons that are not konwn to us. And we are fairly certain now that ‘religion’ in the sense of a political movement, was evolved in REACTION to them. (yep). And this conflcit between religion – including its pseudoscientific secular version today – and science (truthfulness) persists in the current era.

So just as the Common Law (discovered by judges) evolved in reaction to empirical resolution of disputes, quite different from LEGISLATION (commands by politicians), science evolved through trial and error, and the market evolved through trial and error.

That’s an awfully brief explanation of 5000 years. But hopefully it will get the point across.

martial epistemology

Testimony and debate

Non conflation (classism)

Discovered law

Discovered science