Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • Again, and I know this is a hurdle, you can communicate ideas through theology o

    Again, and I know this is a hurdle, you can communicate ideas through theology or mythologically, through philosophy or sophistry, thru pilpul and critique or essay and analysis, thru magic or pseudoscience through literature or history, through science and constructive logic, or any combination thereof.

    The question is only which of those vehicles increases or decreases the opportunity for falsehood, suggestion, deceit, and fraud.

    Unfortunately to reach computation (the use of science, testimony and logic to produce an operational means of communication) requires great knowledge, while every other method requires less and less, and relies more and more on analogy, suggestion, and pretense of knowledge.

    So the method of teaching while it may allow greater suggestion to a broader audience will also allow deception.

    CRT consists of abrahamic pilpul and critique, which seeks only consensus the way idealsm and sophistry seek some sort of truth upon which we can agree. Furthermore while idealism and sophistry in the western tradition generally favor advocacy of something openly stated (Male means of manipulation), pilpul and critique seek to undermine what is, to bring about something else entirely, indirectly (female means of manipulation)/

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-20 15:46:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627696325658566657

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627691595335368706

  • So do are you suggesting that every discipline that uses dedicated vocabulary an

    So do are you suggesting that every discipline that uses dedicated vocabulary and phrasing – all the sciences, including logic and law – don’t or shouldn’t use those terms? Given that the purpose of my work teaching the language necessary for unambiguous decidability in the behavioral sciences, why would I do anything else? This is what we do. If you saw math or programming then you’d expect an inaccessible language for most. While it may not appear so we’re using ordinal mathematics, in what is a via negativa programming language to write formulae in the behavioral sciences – uniting the sciences.
    Since that’s what I teach, that’s what I write in. And if you follow the team at the institute we ‘all talk the same’ so to speak.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-20 04:54:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627532046439530497

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627530474821410818

  • Good, strong, skeptical take. Minimum Understanding: 1. the work (a) unifies the

    Good, strong, skeptical take.

    Minimum Understanding:
    1. the work (a) unifies the sciences in a single universally commensurable formal, operational, constructive logic of falsification (b) produces a formal logic of decidability (c) applied to law to create a formal and…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-20 04:15:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627522187425984513

    Reply addressees: @dannysmanifesto

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627518748402884608

  • Good, strong, skeptical take. Minimum Understanding: 1. the work (a) unifies the

    Good, strong, skeptical take.

    Minimum Understanding:
    1. the work (a) unifies the sciences in a single universally commensurable formal, operational, constructive logic of falsification (b) produces a formal logic of decidability (c) applied to law to create a formal and scientific logic of cooperation and consequently a formal scientific logic vocabulary and grammar of law.
    2. This work applied to formalize empirical common law (negative) and empirically concurrent legislation (positive). then applied to the constitution, amendments, policy reforms. (listed elsewhere in some detail)
    3. Net result is the extension of fraud and protections from commercial production of private goods, services, and information, to political production of commons whether in goods, services, and information. The immediate result is the suppression of the means of baiting into hazard by false promise (fraud) that by social or political construction we can violate the laws of the universe.
    4. This completes the Wilsonian synthesis of the formal (logical), physical, behavioral, and evolutionary sciences, providing universal falsifiability and decidability, completing the natural law program from Aristotle to the present.
    5. To complete this project requires (a) a moral license to demand change (b) a solution to the crisis in a set of morally justifiable demands for change (c) an organized plan of transition (c) demand for restitution, punishment, and prevention (d) an undeniable threat of force if thse moral demands aren’t met: in other words, a repetition of the magna carta, and the founders, by a common law suit against the state for the redress of grievances presented to the state.
    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-20 04:15:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627522187178528770

  • As you mean it, of course I’d agree. As necessary, I wish it were true. It’s not

    As you mean it, of course I’d agree.
    As necessary, I wish it were true. It’s not.
    All language consists of a stream of measurements resulting in a continuous reduction of ambiguity.
    All disciplines require domain-specific vocabulary.
    Universal commensurability across all domains requires we disambiguate sets of domain-specific vocabulary.
    The result is a vocabulary that consists of unambiguous measurements across all domains.
    This is necessary, if we are trying to construct a science that can identify describe, explain and as a consequence prevent the mass production of lying that has plagued the industrial age.
    So just as you must learn to read, must learn mathematics, must learn physics, chemistry, biology, engineering, economics, law et al, the solution to matters of ethics and politics, psychological and social science, requires learning terms that prevent the rapid expansion of not only lying but pseudoscience.
    This is the research and development that our organization performs.
    And it’s for moral ends for the benefit of all.
    -Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 06:37:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627195662566662144

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627190302715830274

  • In general, that’s good advice. But when increasing the number of people you rea

    In general, that’s good advice. But when increasing the number of people you reach, results in reaching people who lack sufficient knowledge to engage in the subject, or who would misunderstand and argue pointlessly, domain-specific language filters out those who would otherwise waste our time.

    Over time we’ve learned that our approach attracts the best and filters out the rest.

    And yes we realize that no everyone approves. But then, not everyone approves of those who disapprove. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-19 05:32:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627179382124040194

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627177614719827970

  • JOURNALISM FROM TESTIMONY TO ACTIVISM The utter disgrace to Journalism is the co

    JOURNALISM FROM TESTIMONY TO ACTIVISM

    The utter disgrace to Journalism is the conversion of the industry from competition for quality of public TESTIMONY (reporting) to activism, with which to undermine the constitution, the law, history, and the trifunctional institutions and traditions that produced the uniqueness of western evolutionary velocity at the cost of demand for paying the high emotional and psychological costs of individual responsibility for private and common.

    If the left is willing to invent the fraudulent promise of freedom from the laws of nature in ‘life after whiteness’ as it did with ‘life after death’ when ‘whiteness’ is but discovery application of and adaptation to the laws of nature, and the proceeds that result, then the right is obligated to fight by whatever means possible to prevent the ongoing disaster of leftism and it’s reinvention of Judaism Christianity and Islam and their war against the Darwinian revolution.

    You can’t promise freedom from scarcity (physical laws), self-interest and amorality (behavioral laws), and genetic mutation and load (evolutionary laws) nor deny truth, reason, correspondence, and consistency, without the right retaliating by whatever means possible.

    You’re just wrong Andrew. And you’re unaware that your decision and bias is as much a product of your genes (feminine verbal, quantity, and consumption bias) as the conservatives (masculine action, quality, and capitalization bias).

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-18 17:55:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627003914376585217

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1627000696707944449

  • RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle Scales of cooperation as a Hierarchy of deci

    RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle Scales of cooperation as a Hierarchy of decidability:

    Decidability by natural limits>action (possible)…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 21:52:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626701038781702146

  • Ideal truth will be largely forever unattainable. Testifiability is attainable.

    Ideal truth will be largely forever unattainable.
    Testifiability is attainable. (performative truth)
    Testifiability within the limits of present knowledge is attainable.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 19:34:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626666530082545668

    Reply addressees: @k_schellinger @elonmusk

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626534004777254912

  • Well, you know, I’m in the business of testimony. I can’t testify to that (you c

    Well, you know, I’m in the business of testimony. I can’t testify to that (you can’t either). We can predict that as one of the many outcomes in a field of possibilities. We can trust our judgment or not, but that’s not making a truth claim about the world – just you. 😉

    People said the paper currency wouldn’t work either. And the paper currency isn’t backed. Digital fiat currency doesn’t even exist as paper. It’s just debt on a hierarchy of ledgers.

    So I stick to criticizing the risks that are unstated or understated and assume it will evolve into something other than what it is, simply because the utility of the ledger is better than any method or tech we have today.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-02-17 17:00:50 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626627746926325760

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626626326516858888