TESTIMONIALISM, TRUTH, AND UNCERTAINTY by James Augustus Berens Negative Convexi

TESTIMONIALISM, TRUTH, AND UNCERTAINTY

by James Augustus Berens

Negative Convexity of Information:

– Dependent variable (y): consequential knowledge

– Input (x): information

– Function (f): human cognition

Justificationism and rationalism only hold when (a) the relationship between (y) and (x) is linear, and (b) when assume the correspondence of (y).

But, f(x) is nonlinear [negative convexity]: an increase in the input (x) will yield more of (y) until the the limits of the function are approached; after which an increase in the input (x) will yield diminishing returns to scale.

Because of uncertainty, we cannot identify the optimal input of (x) for the given function. However, we can test* (y) [via negativa] and conclude with a higher degree of certainty if the output is non-correspondent.

Testing (y) allows us to calibrate our inputs and function to yield higher returns (optimal computation via algorithm).

Testimonialism—as performed warranty of due diligence against error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, deception and fraud—increases the objectivity of (y) through the reduction of subjective inputs (cognitive bias).

*Tests (criticism)

i. identity (category)

ii. internal consistency (logic)

iii. external correspondence (explanatory power)

iv. existential possibility (existence proof)

v. limits (falsification) (parsimony)

vi. full accounting (prohibition on selection bias)

vii. morality (consisting of voluntary transfers)

Ultimately, we can never be fully certain of truth. We can, however, prove possibility (truth candidacy) and incrementally decrease the probability of speaking/testifying falsely.

That is, we advance knowledge through subtraction (via negativa)—not justification (via positiva).

(CURT: This is absolutely flawless. Excellent. )