Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • PROFOUND: MEANING AND TESTIMONY —“Brouwer’s criticisms of classical mathematic

    PROFOUND: MEANING AND TESTIMONY

    —“Brouwer’s criticisms of classical mathematics were concerned with what I shall refer to as ‘the debasement of meaning’”— (Bishop in Rosenblatt, 1985, p. 1)

    Let me see if I can translate this one….

    —“My criticisms of rationalism are concerned with the debasement of the meaning of truth: that which I can testify to having observed. And by consequence the cumulative externalities produced by the systematic debasement of the meaning of truth, and therefore the systematic debasement of our ability to testify truthfully. High trust societies, and their economic velocity, are not possible, or is liberty, under rationalism independent of the requirement for construction”—

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-19 19:57:00 UTC

  • PROFOUND: UNRIGOROUS THOUGHT IS NOT USELESS —“We are not contending that ideal

    PROFOUND: UNRIGOROUS THOUGHT IS NOT USELESS

    —“We are not contending that idealistic mathematics is worthless from the constructive point of view. This would be as silly as contending that unrigorous mathematics is worthless from the classical point of view. Every theorem proved with idealistic methods presents a challenge: to find a constructive version, and to give it a constructive proof.” — (Bishop 1967, Preface, page x)

    Now… lets translate this into the moral domain:

    —“I am not contending that any rational method is worthless for the purpose of truth-telling. That would be silly. Unrigorous thought is useful – we can arrive at theories by whatever means it is possible for us to do so. Every theory that survives by unrigorous – meaning rational – means, presents us with a challenge: to find an operational version and therefore demonstrate that it is existentially possible, open to observation, and therefore something that it is possible to testify to.”—

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-19 19:53:00 UTC

  • PROFOUND: OPERATIONALISM (CONSTRUCTIVISM) AND GODS —“When a man proves a posit

    PROFOUND: OPERATIONALISM (CONSTRUCTIVISM) AND GODS

    —“When a man proves a positive integer to exist, he should show how to find it. If God has mathematics of his own that needs to be done, let him do it himself.”— (Bishop)

    I wonder if I can translate this into the moral domain:

    “When a man asserts that an action is moral, he should show how it is constructed of fully informed, voluntary exchanges, free of negative externality. If the gods have some sort of morality of their own, let them practice it.”

    Oh.. I think I’m proud of that one. 🙂

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-19 19:41:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    https://www.academia.edu/3242047/Real_Direct_RealismSanity.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-19 10:11:00 UTC

  • “Human knowledge, for the most part,is unjustified untrue unbelief”— David Mil

    —“Human knowledge, for the most part,is unjustified untrue unbelief”— David Miller

    Yes David Miller. That describes what it is not. But does not describe what it is: demonstrable.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 06:19:00 UTC

  • de.aristocratia Moral judgement is not a question any more than mathematical for

    de.aristocratia

    Moral judgement is not a question any more than mathematical formulae are questions. Either equations balance, and proofs can be constructed or they cannot. Either fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange, free of externality was performed, or it was not. And in both cases, either information exists sufficient for decidability, or it does not. But no questions are undecidable.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-17 05:24:00 UTC

  • OMG:… Meaning is for poor people. OMG…. That’s my bit of wisdom for the day.

    OMG:… Meaning is for poor people. OMG…. That’s my bit of wisdom for the day.

    Philosophy and meaning are for poor people operationalism (science) and truth telling are for rich people.

    Investigation is expensive.

    The rich get richer, and the poor get poorer.

    OMG.. That’s so true. And so awesome.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-15 04:31:00 UTC

  • Ya wanna know the secret? Science is the art of speaking truthfully. It hasn’t g

    Ya wanna know the secret? Science is the art of speaking truthfully. It hasn’t got anything to with whether we talk about the physical world, or the world of human action, or any other discipline that operates by different rules of regularity. It’s just learning to speak truthfully – and that’s hard. That’s it. Nothing more than that.

    Now ‘the truth’ is just a bit of ideological nonsense – the search for god. It’s meaningless. Searching for truth is like searching for god. A bit of verbal naivety. A child’s mythos.

    Instead, we try to speak as truthfully as possible at whatever level of precision we are capable of currently speaking in any given field of inquiry. Our search is merely to find the most truthful expression we can craft short of a tautology.

    Cool huh?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-14 11:51:00 UTC

  • THE TRUTH SPECTRUM (most important thing I’ve written lately) (first draft) Mean

    THE TRUTH SPECTRUM

    (most important thing I’ve written lately) (first draft)

    Meaningful……Truthful…………..Truth……………..Tautology

    Felt………………Demonstrated…Assumed………..Found

    Intuitionistic…. Operational…….Parsimonious….Identical

    Experiential…..Existential………Theoretical……..Axiomatic

    Useful…………..Actionable……..Impossible………Irrelevant

    Mental………….Physical…………Metaphysical…..Verbal

    Imaginary……..Knowable………Unknowable…….Tautological

    |–Informational Correspondence——————————–>|

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-14 07:25:00 UTC

  • Today’s lesson. Philosophy of this depth – testimonial truth and operationalism

    Today’s lesson. Philosophy of this depth – testimonial truth and operationalism – is way, waaaaay too much for morals. So just keep it at the high level: you cannot speak the truth, since you can never know it. You can however speak truthfully, and you can learn how to speak truthfully, and if you speak truthfully you can warrant that of which you speak. This does not guarantee it is free of error, it merely means that you have done your diligence in the prevention of harm.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-13 11:31:00 UTC