Category: Epistemology and Method

  • @paulromer #mathiness Math and Rationalism are not the only means of justifying

    @paulromer #mathiness Math and Rationalism are not the only means of justifying pseudoscientific statements. Propaganda is also.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-04 08:38:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/606379402314805248

  • @paulromer #mathiness Operational testing (criticism) is most necessary in econo

    @paulromer #mathiness Operational testing (criticism) is most necessary in economics and psychology. Psychology reformed. Economics didn’t.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-04 08:35:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/606378687949357056

  • @paulromer #mathiness Mises, Brouwer, Bridgman and Minsky all failed to complete

    @paulromer #mathiness Mises, Brouwer, Bridgman and Minsky all failed to complete the Operational revolution against pseudoscience.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-04 08:33:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/606378126474637312

  • DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY FOR THE WARRANTY OF TRUTHFULNESS 1) Have we achieved ide

    DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY FOR THE WARRANTY OF TRUTHFULNESS

    1) Have we achieved identity? Is it categorically consistent?

    2) Is it internally consistent? Is it logical? Can we construct a proof(test) of internal consistency?

    3) Is it externally correspondent, and sufficiently parsimonious? Can we construct a proof (test) of external correspondence.

    4) Is it existentially possible? Is it operationally articulated? Can we construct a proof (test) of existential possibility?

    5) Is it fully accounted? Do we account for all costs to all capital in all temporal and inter-temporal dimensions? (Have we avoided selection bias?) Can we construct a proof (test) of full accounting?

    6) Is it morally constrained? Does it violate the incentive to cooperate? (Meaning, are all operations productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers, free of negative externality of the same criterion?)

    If you cannot answer these questions or do not understand them you cannot know if you speak the truth, or if you are polluting the commons with fantasy, bias, error, or deception.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-04 08:02:00 UTC

  • Definitions: Truth, Truthfulness, and Honesty

    [D]EFINITIONS OF TRUTH.TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH: That testimony you give when you promising the equality of two statements using different terms: A circular definition, a statement of equality or a statement of identity. ANALYTIC TRUTH: The testimony you give promising the internal consistency of one or more statements used in the construction of a proof in an axiomatic(declarative) system. (a Logical Truth). IDEAL TRUTH: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. (Ideal Truth = Perfect Parsimony.) TRUTHFULNESS: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. HONESTY: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.Intuition: (sentimental expression) – an uncritical, uncriticized, response to information that expresses a measure of existing biases (priors).Preference (rational expression) : a justification of one’s biases (wants). Opinion: (justificationism) – a justified uncritical statement given the limits of one’s knowledge about external questions.Position: (criticism) – a theoretical statement that survives one’s available criticisms about external questions.Demonstrated Preference: – Evidence of intuition, preference, opinion, and position as demonstrated by your actions, independent of your statements.A Hierarchy of Truths:

    1. True enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
    2. True enough for me to feel good about myself.
    3. True enough for me to take actions that produce positive results.
    4. True enough for me to not cause others to react negatively to me.
    5. True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
    6. True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different values.
    7. True regardless of all opinions or perspectives.
    8. Tautologically true: in that the two things are equal.

    TRUTH IS A WARRANTY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES.Source: (1) Curt Doolittle

  • Definitions: Truth, Truthfulness, and Honesty

    [D]EFINITIONS OF TRUTH.TAUTOLOGICAL TRUTH: That testimony you give when you promising the equality of two statements using different terms: A circular definition, a statement of equality or a statement of identity. ANALYTIC TRUTH: The testimony you give promising the internal consistency of one or more statements used in the construction of a proof in an axiomatic(declarative) system. (a Logical Truth). IDEAL TRUTH: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. (Ideal Truth = Perfect Parsimony.) TRUTHFULNESS: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony. HONESTY: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.Intuition: (sentimental expression) – an uncritical, uncriticized, response to information that expresses a measure of existing biases (priors).Preference (rational expression) : a justification of one’s biases (wants). Opinion: (justificationism) – a justified uncritical statement given the limits of one’s knowledge about external questions.Position: (criticism) – a theoretical statement that survives one’s available criticisms about external questions.Demonstrated Preference: – Evidence of intuition, preference, opinion, and position as demonstrated by your actions, independent of your statements.A Hierarchy of Truths:

    1. True enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
    2. True enough for me to feel good about myself.
    3. True enough for me to take actions that produce positive results.
    4. True enough for me to not cause others to react negatively to me.
    5. True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
    6. True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different values.
    7. True regardless of all opinions or perspectives.
    8. Tautologically true: in that the two things are equal.

    TRUTH IS A WARRANTY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES.Source: (1) Curt Doolittle

  • DEFINITIONS OF TRUTH. TRUTH: That testimony (description) you would give, if you

    DEFINITIONS OF TRUTH.

    TRUTH: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, would provide the same testimony.

    TRUTHFULNESS: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, and warranty free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, would provide the same testimony.

    HONESTY: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, would provide the same testimony.

    TRUTH IS A WARRANTY OF DIFFERENT DEGREES.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-28 04:15:00 UTC

  • IS A THEORY GOOD BECAUSE IT IS USEFUL, OR BECAUSE WE FEEL IT IS TRUE? And is it

    IS A THEORY GOOD BECAUSE IT IS USEFUL, OR BECAUSE WE FEEL IT IS TRUE? And is it truthful because we can defend it, or because we cannot falsify it?

    (slightly tricky question)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 03:59:00 UTC

  • YES, MY POINT OF VIEW (MY VALUES) ARE WESTERN: SCIENTIFIC. BUT THAT IMPLIES BIAS

    YES, MY POINT OF VIEW (MY VALUES) ARE WESTERN: SCIENTIFIC. BUT THAT IMPLIES BIAS AND RELATIVITY NOT TRUTH. SO WHY AM I SO INTERESTED IN TRUTH?

    (h/t Karl )

    My point of view *IS* western; meaning: scientific. That is correct.

    Operations named can indeed be used as narrative for meaning. That is correct. Although that says nothing about the truth of the meaning inferred from the operations..

    Other cultures do not use rule of law, as such do not require logic in decision making. Yet liberty is only logically possible under rule of law. Other cultures don’t desire liberty. They desire consumption (as do most people in our culture as well). At present, liberty is a cultural preference of aristocratic civilization. But that just means that aristocratic civilization is scientific in function.

    I don’t generally make moral arguments except for ‘fun’ – I make AMORAL arguments. That’s the beauty of this logic: it’s not loaded. So, if one seeks to use this logic to create any possible political order, one can do so. But one need not (and cannot) resort to deception to do it.

    What isn’t obvious is that if you use this logic you can create non-monopoly social orders in a heterogeneous polity assuming that the rulers (monarchy) persists in maintaining rule of law, common organic law, property en toto, decide-able by the requirement for fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary exchange.

    Unlike unlimited free-associationists (advocates of the heroism of science) I am not interested in furthering free association – I don’t think it can be furthered. I’m only interested in preventing bias, propaganda and deceit. I am not even that concerned with error.

    Just as christianity was used to destroy western religion and thought, pseudoscience as used to destroy western law and thought.

    Rule of law is our religion. Virtue is our religion. Nature is our religion. Commons are the produce of our religion. And truth is our most precious commons.

    Curt


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 03:54:00 UTC

  • There is a big difference between adding empirical content and removing imaginar

    There is a big difference between adding empirical content and removing imaginary content.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-25 16:37:00 UTC