Testimonial Pragmatism & Propertarian CalculusTestimonial Pragmatism & Propertar

Testimonial Pragmatism & Propertarian CalculusTestimonial Pragmatism & Propertarian Calculus

SINGULAR SPEECH·THURSDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2018

Presuppositions of the Scientific Process

The scientific process allows us to create and test hypothesis such that we can use them to explain phenomena (within a degree of precision) and act on that knowledge (within the scope given by precision); but even such use comes with presuppositions (inherent limits).Presuppositions = [ Regularity | Shared Language ]One needs to presuppose that the phenomena under investigation have useful regularities which we can capture in a model (precise enough for us to act on it). If no regularity existed, our model would fail to help us make any prediction with any degree of reliability, and as such, it would work no better than fiction.Regularity := Unpredictable > Heuristic > Probabilistic > Deterministic > ConstantRegularity (constancy) sets an ideal limit on testing criteria, whose repeated application tests the consistency of models as they evolve, this guarantees constant maintenance of coherent models as a response to advances in instrumentation and logic.Science requires a common set of testing criteria, since without such common criteria, anyone could claim scientific status for their propositions. Science must work by the mapping of the “platonic folds” where theories fail to correspond enough with our data as to have any practical use.Shared Language := Nonsense > Associative > Meaningful > Operational > SynchronousSimultaneity (synchronism) sets an ideal limit on shared languages, which allows us to elaborate descriptions and constrain our imagination to that which someone seeks to communicate.Without (at least) an operational shared language, others will not execute commands (to measure, compare and transform) as intended. Deviations from shared language can result in many self-proclaimed “scientific” communities talking past each other.

Assumptions & Tools in Specific Disciplines

Beyond the core presuppositions that define science itself, specific disciplines adjoin premises (which complement the method), procedures (which sets a standard of action), techniques (which defines a common set of operations), and instruments (which expand the scope of exploration).Assumptions = [ Premises | Procedures | Techniques | Instruments ]Premises either evolve all the way from initial hypothesis towards its foundational status (in the scientific field) or result from the addition of ontological and logical assumptions from an expanded shared language.Ontological premises increase the vocabulary of a particular discipline beyond that of the scientific method, thus it provides the basic conceptual framework for further discussion. Scientific revolutions often result from the inspection into the “platonic foldings” (which define limits) for these systems.Logical premises restrict the range of linguistic operations upon which formal models get constructed. One can find the limits of a theory by mapping the points of failure where those limited set of operations predict beyond an acceptable margin of error.Techniques and Instruments evolve along with advances in technology (which expand that our physical senses), developments in the formal logic (which restrict our mental operations), and establishment of social institutions (which organize the community).Procedures evolve along with the tools of science (techniques and instruments) as operational definitions that convert theoretical constructs into measurable, comparable and transmutable data which one can then use.

Testing Criteria and Testimonial Constraints

Testing Criteria = [ Categorical | Logical | Empirical | Operational | Moral ] Testimonial Constraints = [ Scope | Information | Time ]The Categorical (which we may also call naming or identity) criterion refers to the proper avoidance of conflation by making explicit the ontology of a theory through labels and definitions, this allows us to eliminate a great deal of ambiguity and vagueness.The Logical (which we may also call internal consistency) criterion refers to the correct use of logical structures in our formal models of a theory and consistent narrative in informal models, this allows to eliminate ambiguity, restrict linguistic operations and to make further inferences.The Empirical (which we may also call external consistency) criterion refers to the use of data obtained from observations and experiments (through procedures) in order to verify predictions from theory.The Operational (which we may also call existential) criterion refers to the use of procedures in order to map from categories extant in our models into data which we can measure, compare and transform.The Moral (which we may also call reciprocal) criterion refers to the preservation of human cooperation, and for such to happen, our transactions must remain productive, symmetrical, warrantied, voluntary, and without negative externality.The Scope (which we may also call falsifiability) constraint refers to the use of empirical data and logical systems to find the limits where a theory fails to work with enough precision for us to act on it.The Information (which we may also call full accounting) constraint refers to the proper accounting of all relevant information through bias removal mechanisms such as double-blind, controlled, randomized trials; evaluation of construct validity; and market judgement (survival upon application).The Time (which we may also call survival) constraint refers to the survival of ideas after repeated exposure to testimonial judgement by all previous criteria to such an extent that we just integrate them into our assumptions.The Categorical, and Logical, and Empirical, and Operational, and Moral criteria judge the regularity of theories on (independent) dimensions of truthfulness, whereas the Information, and Scope, and Time criteria define constraints and obligations upon the application of all.

Assertions and Arguments under Testimonial Pragmatism

Assertions := Conceptual > Preferential > Practical > Moral > Rational > Decidable > Objective > IdenticalIdentical (tautological) propositions set an ideal limit on assertions, such that they describe with the greatest parsimony and precision possible.Arguments = [ Emotional | Normative | Logical | Analogical | Empirical | Economic | Testimonial ]Emotional arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by relating it to an emotional response upon the subject. It also includes arguments based on one’s intuitions.Normative arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by comparing it against the rules and norms which one considers to apply, whether its origin is biological, social, economic, or religious.Logical arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by analysis of the conceptual (its categorical consistency) and linguistic structure of the argument (its internal consistency).Analogical arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by means of a comparison with similar assertions about events in different contexts, such as the reference to specific examples.Empirical arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by using procedures to obtain data (measurement) and compare it with an assertion derived from an hypothesis (its external consistency).Economic arguments support (or contradict) an assertion by means like those of empirical arguments, but whose data comes from uncontrolled variable which one cannot measure directly.Testimonial arguments make use of normative, logical, analogical, empirical, and economic arguments in order to make practical, moral, rational, decidable, and objective assertions that survive the tests of categorical, logical, empirical, and operational consistency under the scope, information, and time constraints.

Evolutionary Epistemology under Testimonial Pragmatism

The scientific process works by use of its scientific method, which refers to the application of testing criteria as a way to filter out that which one finds untrue, rather than selection of that which is true.Assumptions := Association > Hypothesis > Theory > Law > AssumptionOne can visualize the process, being one of inquiry, as starting with a problem and proceeding towards a solution, but it does not impose limits upon how one arrives to the initial hypothesis, one is free to engage in creative association.Upon achieving crucial ideas by free association (of ideas), one needs to formulate an hypothesis by proper organization of concepts (hypothesis must survive identity and logical tests) and their operational definitions (which allows one to apply empirical tests).The hypothesis which survives further testing (by our application of empirical tests) become theories which we will perpetually submit to further testing as we evolve beyond our previous assumptions.Once a theory survives application in the markets it becomes a law, which in the case of human cooperation includes the test of reciprocal consistency. Those laws which survive the tests of time (continuous application of tests over time) may evolve into assumptions (our collective premises).While the previous description applies to the evolution of knowledge into premises, similar series apply to the evolution of other discipline specific assumptions such as procedures, techniques, and even instruments.

Knowledge beyond Testimonial Pragmatism

Knowledge = [ Presuppositions | Assumptions | Traditions | Experiences ]One can also consider a broader pragmatic hierarchy, where testimonial pragmatism remains at the center as its core (along with its presuppositions). Beyond this core we see each discipline add further assumptions, which must still submit to testimonial judgement.Beyond core presuppositions and discipline specific assumptions one can include inherited traditions and personal experiences. Time tested heuristics (embedded in traditions) have survival value, even if we cannot ascertain its reason in declarative propositions.Personal experiences which do not contradict testimonial law also take part on the hierarchy. Such experiences may help one to compose their own personal morality and may aid in the discovery phase of the scientific process.

Demonstrated Property under Propertarian Calculus

Self-Property – Body, Time, Actions, Memory, Concepts, Status, etc.

Personal Property – Houses, Cars, “Things”, etc.

Kinship Property – Mates, Children, Family, Friends, etc.

Cooperative Property – Organizational and Knowledge ties.

Shareholder Property – Recorded and Quantified shares.

Common Property – Citizenship, Artificial Property.

Informal Institutional Property – Manners, Ethics, Morals, Myths, Rituals.

Formal Institutional Property – Religion, Government, Laws.

{TO BE CONTINUED…}