Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

I know your insecurity is offended and that you’re trying desperately impose altruisitc punishment to satisfy it -it’s an animal instinct and you can’t really resist. And you can’t succeed because I’m immune to feminine shaming, just as I’m immune to the criticism of children, because I’m immune to demand for equality, because any equality would be a pretense – a lie.
As for your rather sophomoric attempt to criticize my previous explanation of the first rule of grammar, which is “continuous recursive disambiguation” satisfied by unambiguous and therefore complete sentences. And in that violation leaving undefined the term, where I gave an operational (causal) explanation of the term, I attempted to illustrate (a) how to solve ambiguity (b) how must sophistries of deception, by inflation and conflaition, are achieved by such non-operational incomplete disambiguation, and (c) for those knowledgeable enough to recognize that this is the means by which all pseudointellectual claims in theology and philosophy are constructed, including my mose favored: the non paradox of the liar’s paradox.

Now you don’t know this but there is a greater difference between you and I than between you and a kindergardener. That’s not an insult to you. It’s a statement that you’re normal. But you have no idea to whom you speak, and while my staff and followers no doubt find this tete a tete an opportunity for recreational humor, the understanding I have of pretty much everything in the formal and behavioral sciences is inconceivable to you.

You are confused by the fact that very few people like me devote time to any social media forum, even though some of my peers in the physical sciences and mathematics can be found on Quora and Stack Overflow.

Whether fortunately or unfortunately, one of the utilities of social media was it’s provision of endless linguistic analysis and costless tests of running experiments that provoke demonstrated rather than reported behavior. This helped us overcome the problem of pseudoscience in the behavioral sciences, and uniting compputational linguistics, cognitive science, behavioral economics, and law. The search for coherence across those disciplines created a means of falsification of each allowing us to produce a universally commensurable value neutral paradigm, vocabulary, grammar, and logic of all disciplines, thereby solving the Wilsonian Synthesis by a means that was purely accidental.

Now, we will publish this year or next. It takes much longer than we think. But we work as a team seven days a week and make steady progress. And Like Darwin, I have not we have not published incrementally, but waited until the work was complete.

Good luck in your journey. But I woud suggest you keep your moral outrage to yourself. 😉 And do as I do, which is educate the willing whenever possible, and suggest a bit of wisdom when it might be of use to some.
It’s the moral thing to do.

Cheers

Reply addressees: @NafetsNez @KonstantinKisin