“Curt, What Do You Mean by ‘Serialization’?”

“CURT, WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY ‘SERIALIZATION’?”

(important) (core)

—“What is serialization?”—Duke Newcomb

(From the P-Method of “Disambiguation, Serialization, and Operationalization”)

Before using a term, define the term, by researching the etymology of the term (history), then collecting all synonyms and antonyms (and etymology) and organizing them into one or more series by common properties.

We use serialization to force disambiguation between terms that appear similar but are not equal for use in naming(referencing) or deduction.

This is how we converted common language into a fully commensurable system of measurement, and expose our errors, and our ignorance, and most sophisms whether a deceit-fallacy, ideal-verbal, pseudoscientific-magical, or supernatural-occult

Examples using ‘True’:

DUE DILIGENCE AS CONSTANT RELATION

tautologically true, idealistically true, testimonially(really) true, honestly true, impulsively true.

and:

DECIDABILITY AS CONSTANT RELATION

incomprehensible, comprehensible(understandable), agreement(on understanding), preferential(for me), good(mutually preferential), testimonially true (decidable); ideally true(logically), or tautologically true(identical).

Some Other Examples on our site, particularly after item seven:

https://naturallawinstitute.com/basic-concepts/the-cheat-sheet/

It’s sort of like (exactly like) creating a number line, or a series of points on a line. The number line creates a system of measurement by some underlying constant relation (in the case of numbers, position), and then points on a line which test conformity to the constant relation (constant positional relation between n-dimensional positions.

Operationalism is a bit harder: writing complete sentences as transactions with a consistent point of view, in ePrime.

Testimonial Operationalism is a bit harder: writing those same complete sentences as promissory observations,

Operationalism into Acquisition, Property-in-toto, and Reciprocity is a bit harder. This requires you start using economics of human behavior.

But once you get there by combining serialization, operationalism, and acquisitionism, you have the formal logic of all human language – a universal commensurable system of measurement for human speech.

“The Grammars” just provide a sort of (precise) equivalent to the table of fundamental particles, the periodic table of the elements, the dimensions of geometry, except, for all human language from the logics on one end to lying on the other, and with the Grammars you can learn rather easily to quickly recognize what techniques others are using to justify their ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, or deceit.

This is why I usually refer to the P-Method as the ‘Geometry of Thought”. Because just as Descartes restored mathematics to geometry, The british empiricists restored testimony to geometry (empiricism, I’m restoring all language to geometry.

By geometry I mean real (aristotle) constant relations(engineering), instead of ideal (platonic) constant relations(literary association), or supernatural(semitic) constant relations (astrology, making-stuff-up (ie: lying)).

However this big picture of the differences caused by the civilizational origins of their thought and it’s incorporation into the their rationalizations and language, and metaphysics, and habits, is invisible to almost everyone. I just write it here so the few who might want to see that pattern can discover it.

-Curt