Author: Curt Doolittle

  • I understand. That said, when the first team formed around me to develop my work

    I understand. That said, when the first team formed around me to develop my work they were adamant that I would never be able to communicate with neurotypicals or normies, and as such that I should expect others to take on that burden (which has happened).
    Average people (and below average people) lack the knowledge to comprehend ideas of increasing abstraction and density. Furthermore, terminology varies between disciplines in order to disambiguate differences in phenomena between disciplines.
    Because as we have seen, the tendency of simple people to deduce, infer, or guess (or fictionalize) from overly reductive concepts can only be defended against through increases in precision that require … precise language.
    Worse, it’s tedious to speak in ‘primitive’ prose rather than ‘sophisticated’ dense prose.
    Worse, unless we share the same understanding of terms it’s not clear we understand what one another is saying.
    My work in operational prose attempts to improve that clarity by prohibiting many terms, and using a few very precisely defined terms.
    But it too is a precise language even if it’s designed to be universal and as such eliminate much of the nonsense prose you’re probably referring to.
    God knows I criticize the nonsense prose of marxism and postmodernism on a daily basis. 😉

    Reply addressees: @E_TN_OG


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 14:37:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766110906776174592

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766033349607293372

  • (Technically speaking, French civilization is Latin and Feminine. German is Germ

    (Technically speaking, French civilization is Latin and Feminine. German is Germanic and masculine, and Russian is an admixture of Slavic and Mongol masculine brutality. The native religion of the french region of europe was a venus cult.)


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 14:30:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766109148327055412

    Reply addressees: @AndThird70475 @matteo_pilgrim

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766104681196183704

  • Yes. 😉

    Yes. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 13:38:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766096135100240066

    Reply addressees: @matteo_pilgrim

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766092903535792374

  • RT @ScottAdamsSays: Probably because the cartels are partnering with whoever who

    RT @ScottAdamsSays: Probably because the cartels are partnering with whoever who is in charge of our country.

    My working assumption is th…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 08:27:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1766017944515932275

  • RT @ScottAdamsSays: Levels of Awareness in politics Level 1 They believe what th

    RT @ScottAdamsSays: Levels of Awareness in politics

    Level 1

    They believe what their preferred news say and do not sample other sources. N…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 03:19:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765940390941597811

  • Why on Earth would you think such a silly thing?

    Why on Earth would you think such a silly thing?


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 03:07:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765937381151043836

    Reply addressees: @E_TN_OG

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765914836007875064

  • The Industrial Revolution and the events leading up to it contributed to the dec

    The Industrial Revolution and the events leading up to it contributed to the decline of empires and the rise of nation-states in several ways:

    Shifting economic power: The Industrial Revolution led to the rise of a new class of wealthy industrialists and a growing middle class, which challenged the traditional power structures of aristocracy and monarchy that were the backbone of empires.
    Nationalism: The Age of Enlightenment and the French Revolution popularized ideas of individual rights, self-determination, and national identity. This fueled the desire for people to govern themselves as nation-states rather than be ruled by distant empires.
    Technological advancements: Improvements in communication and transportation (e.g., printing press, railways, telegraphs) made it easier for people to spread ideas, organize, and challenge central authority, thus weakening the control of empires.
    Changing warfare: Industrialization led to advancements in weaponry and changes in military tactics, which made it more difficult for empires to maintain control over vast territories and diverse populations.
    Economic strain: The costs of maintaining empire became increasingly burdensome, especially as colonies began to demand more autonomy and resist imperial control. The Industrial Revolution also disrupted traditional economic systems, further weakening the foundations of empires.
    Self-determination movements: As education spread and people became more politically aware, there were growing calls for self-governance and independence from imperial rule. This led to a wave of revolutions and independence movements in the 19th and 20th centuries.
    Competition among industrial powers: As nations like Britain, France, Germany, and the United States industrialized, they began to compete for global influence and resources, leading to a scramble for colonies and a shift towards nation-state rivalries.

    Over time, these factors combined to weaken the traditional imperial model and give rise to the modern nation-state system, although the process was gradual and varied across different regions of the world.

    Reply addressees: @OrganBuxtehude


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 01:23:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765911163924000768

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765909847889813916

  • “Q: What’s the difference between a civilization state and an empire?”– The con

    –“Q: What’s the difference between a civilization state and an empire?”–

    The concepts of a “civilization state” and an “empire” represent two different ways of organizing and understanding political, cultural, and social entities on a large scale. While there is some overlap in how these terms can be applied historically and contemporarily, they are distinct in several key aspects:

    Civilization State
    Definition: A civilization state is a concept where the state’s identity, legitimacy, and organizational principles are deeply rooted in the long-standing cultural, historical, and civilizational identity of a specific group or society. It emphasizes a shared civilization as the core of its national identity, rather than just political boundaries or governance structures.

    Cultural Unity: In a civilization state, there is a strong emphasis on cultural unity and continuity. The state sees itself as the custodian of a particular civilization’s heritage, values, and traditions, which transcend current political and geographical boundaries.

    Homogeneity: Although a civilization state is characterized by a dominant culture or civilization, it can be inclusive of various ethnic, linguistic, and cultural groups within its territory, provided these groups identify with or assimilate into the primary civilization narrative.

    Modern Examples: China is often cited as a modern example of a civilization state, with its leaders emphasizing the country’s 5,000-year history and civilization as central to its national identity and statecraft.

    Empire
    Definition: An empire is a political entity characterized by the extensive territorial or colonial dominion controlled by a single sovereign authority, usually an emperor or a monarch. Empires are defined by their expansionist tendencies, conquests, and the subjugation of diverse peoples.

    Political and Military Power: Empires are typically established and maintained through military conquest and the exercise of political power over conquered territories. The central authority imposes control, often integrating or assimilating various peoples into the empire’s administrative and governance structures.

    Heterogeneity Through Conquest: While empires can encompass a wide range of cultures, languages, and ethnic groups, this diversity is usually a result of conquest and annexation rather than a shared civilizational identity. The cohesion of an empire is often maintained through force, administration, and the central authority’s power, rather than a voluntary shared identity.

    Historical Examples: Historical examples of empires include the Roman Empire, the British Empire, and the Ottoman Empire. These entities expanded through military conquest and exerted control over diverse peoples and territories.

    Key Differences
    Basis of Unity: Civilization states are united by a shared civilizational identity, whereas empires are often held together by political and military power.
    Expansion: Empires typically expand through conquest, while civilization states emphasize cultural and historical continuity within their existing boundaries.
    Identity: In a civilization state, the identity is rooted in historical and cultural commonality. In contrast, an empire’s identity may be more closely tied to the power and reach of its ruling authority.

    Reply addressees: @OrganBuxtehude


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 01:19:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765910159417544704

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765909085172404722

  • THE IMPORTANCE OF P-LAW UNAMBIGUITY The set of criteria for testifiable prose is

    THE IMPORTANCE OF P-LAW UNAMBIGUITY
    The set of criteria for testifiable prose is designed to create a form of communication that is, above all, unambiguous. By requiring complete sentences in promissory and testimonial form, using operational vocabulary, avoiding the verb “to be,” and including all relevant changes in state and their consequences, testifiable prose eliminates the potential for multiple interpretations or misunderstandings.

    This unambiguity is crucial for converting ordinary language, which is often riddled with vagueness and ambiguity, into precise systems of measurement. By ensuring that each statement or claim is clear, specific, and unambiguous, testifiable prose allows for the creation of a common language that can be used to accurately describe, analyze, and compare various phenomena or ideas.

    Moreover, the unambiguity of testifiable prose plays a vital role in suppressing errors and deceits that can arise from deduction, inference, abduction, and analogy. When language is ambiguous or open to multiple interpretations, it becomes easier for fallacious arguments or misleading conclusions to take hold. By contrast, the strict criteria of testifiable prose make it much more difficult for such errors and deceits to go unnoticed or unchallenged.

    In addition to promoting clarity, objectivity, actionable content, comprehensiveness, testability, logical consistency, accessibility, reproducibility, and providing a foundation for further analysis, the unambiguity achieved through testifiable prose is perhaps its most significant benefit. It enables more precise communication, reduces the potential for misunderstandings or misinterpretations, and helps to create a shared understanding of the subject matter at hand.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 00:42:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765900960574943232

  • This would be rational for members of the Visegrad Group of states, for slightly

    This would be rational for members of the Visegrad Group of states, for slightly less demanding reasons than that of Russia as the ‘borderland’.
    Meaning small countries late to enlightenment, late to industrialization, and late to economic power require scale to defend against those states that due to geography and limited trade, and distance from the british intellectual revolutions, are repeatedly at a disadvantage economic and strategically even if at a cultural advantage by observing the failures that emerge in those countries that evolve earlier and faster.
    This is true of all tech. It’s better to be second or third. This is why fascism was better than anglo classical liberalism, French utopian liberalism, jewish communism – they saw what happened and wanted none of it.

    What you want and what is good for you is different from the science that describes the spectrum of choices given our differing states of development and our positions as innovators vs adopters.

    You’re vaforing the adopter position because it’s logical for you to do so – and you and yours still have SOME opportunity to prevent the ‘bads’ whether liberal(finance), authoritarian (state), or islamic (Faith)

    See: https://t.co/uI5FujWKcv

    Reply addressees: @AutistocratMS


    Source date (UTC): 2024-03-08 00:37:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765899560981815296

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1765896923855134828