—“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-
Author: Curt Doolittle
-
Under Propertarianism, Operationalism Prevents Exporting “Harm” (Costs)
—“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-
-
Under Propertarianism, Operationalism Prevents Exporting "Harm" (Costs)
—“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-
-
Under Propertarianism, Operationalism Prevents Exporting “Harm” (Costs)
—“[A]ll arguments put into the marketplace of ideas function as conceptual goods – products for our use. Now since we are producing goods we do have the ability if not the necessity to provide consumer protection. This is all that operationalism does for us. It doesnt say you’re doing good (telling the truth) it tests whether or not you are doing HARM. It makes sure that you’re not using verbalisms. Under Propertarianism we require you warranty your goods and services. And those warranties are subject to legal enforcement by universal standing where the loser pays.”—-
-
Does Western Culture All Come Down To Truth Telling?
[E]mpirical Science (aristotelianism) has evolved into a universal language. The voluntary organization of production under property and rule of law have evolved into a universal language. Scientific research and production take place within a society. The society vastly impacts the quality of that research and production. The people conducting research carry with them the assumptions of their societies. Some societies excel at conducting scientific research. Some societies are all but incapable of conducting scientific research. Some societies excel at instituting property rights and rule of law. Some societies are all but incapable of instituting property rights and rule of law. Some societies excel at constructing trust Some societies are all but incapable of constructing trust. Some societies excel at institutionalizing telling the truth. Some societies are all but incapable of institutionalizing telling the truth. What makes a society tell the truth, construct trust, institute property rights, and conduct scientific research? Telling the truth. Why tell the truth? For voluntary warriors it’s a matter of life and death. If nearly every man is a warrior, and only warriors possess wealth, and for warriors truth is a matter of life and death. From that position came the west’s rise. —Small numbers + technology + truth + contract—
-
Does Western Culture All Come Down To Truth Telling?
[E]mpirical Science (aristotelianism) has evolved into a universal language. The voluntary organization of production under property and rule of law have evolved into a universal language. Scientific research and production take place within a society. The society vastly impacts the quality of that research and production. The people conducting research carry with them the assumptions of their societies. Some societies excel at conducting scientific research. Some societies are all but incapable of conducting scientific research. Some societies excel at instituting property rights and rule of law. Some societies are all but incapable of instituting property rights and rule of law. Some societies excel at constructing trust Some societies are all but incapable of constructing trust. Some societies excel at institutionalizing telling the truth. Some societies are all but incapable of institutionalizing telling the truth. What makes a society tell the truth, construct trust, institute property rights, and conduct scientific research? Telling the truth. Why tell the truth? For voluntary warriors it’s a matter of life and death. If nearly every man is a warrior, and only warriors possess wealth, and for warriors truth is a matter of life and death. From that position came the west’s rise. —Small numbers + technology + truth + contract—
-
Operationalism as a General Rule
[O]perationalism asks us to demonstrate that we are conducting observations of extant entities not projecting imagination and subjectivity. As a general rule: *** We shall define all phenomenon which we choose to observe, in terms of the sequence of physical operations (actions) used, the instruments used, and the measurements taken with those instruments (whether cardinal or ordinal), rather than either the use of analogies of any form, interpretations of those observations, or subjective experiences of those observations, so that we guarantee to any audience that all entities that we refer to exist, and that no information is added to the observation but that which can be observed when reproduced by the repetition of those actions, instruments and measurements by others.***
-
Operationalism as a General Rule
[O]perationalism asks us to demonstrate that we are conducting observations of extant entities not projecting imagination and subjectivity. As a general rule: *** We shall define all phenomenon which we choose to observe, in terms of the sequence of physical operations (actions) used, the instruments used, and the measurements taken with those instruments (whether cardinal or ordinal), rather than either the use of analogies of any form, interpretations of those observations, or subjective experiences of those observations, so that we guarantee to any audience that all entities that we refer to exist, and that no information is added to the observation but that which can be observed when reproduced by the repetition of those actions, instruments and measurements by others.***
-
We Can Prevent Lies Easily If the Normative Commons is Common Property
[S]o libel, slander, defamation, are acceptable to you, I ‘m sure. So are Keynesian economics, Marxism upon which it is based, Freudian Psychology, Cantor’s sets, Mises’ Praxeology, Rothbard’s Ethics, The Frankfurt School, Feminism (feminist socialism), Boasian Pseudo-Anthropology, Postmodernism (the attack on truth), the marxist attack on education, the marxist attack on art, all of which were constructed of pseudoscientific arguments and all of which were permissible under free speech, but none of which would have been possible if individuals possessed the right of standing to require truth in politics law and commerce. It is ok I suspect to pollute the physical commons but not the normative commons? Do you have some evidence that such constraints place such limits on progress rather than improve progress? Or even a rational argument to demonstrate why (because you can’t, which is Bridgman’s position). Calling a woman a whore under anglo saxon law was equivalent to attempted murder that exposed the skull. Words have consequences. Why would some people prefer that words NOT have consequences unless they feared being held accountable for their consequences? THE PEOPLE WHO TAUGHT US TO LIE
-
We Can Prevent Lies Easily If the Normative Commons is Common Property
[S]o libel, slander, defamation, are acceptable to you, I ‘m sure. So are Keynesian economics, Marxism upon which it is based, Freudian Psychology, Cantor’s sets, Mises’ Praxeology, Rothbard’s Ethics, The Frankfurt School, Feminism (feminist socialism), Boasian Pseudo-Anthropology, Postmodernism (the attack on truth), the marxist attack on education, the marxist attack on art, all of which were constructed of pseudoscientific arguments and all of which were permissible under free speech, but none of which would have been possible if individuals possessed the right of standing to require truth in politics law and commerce. It is ok I suspect to pollute the physical commons but not the normative commons? Do you have some evidence that such constraints place such limits on progress rather than improve progress? Or even a rational argument to demonstrate why (because you can’t, which is Bridgman’s position). Calling a woman a whore under anglo saxon law was equivalent to attempted murder that exposed the skull. Words have consequences. Why would some people prefer that words NOT have consequences unless they feared being held accountable for their consequences? THE PEOPLE WHO TAUGHT US TO LIE