Evidence is what it is.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 19:23:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567594522015633408
Reply addressees: @MGFreelance
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567594265403867138
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
Well, if you knew what you’re talking about you’d know that just as the positiva
Well, if you knew what you’re talking about you’d know that just as the positiva logic program failed(Godel), the search for a positiva (proof) scientific method failed (Strawson), as Popper predicted (falsification) you’d understand my work on adversarial falsification. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 17:27:41 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567565281542782976
Reply addressees: @thebigfatplan @KWintie @CRSerenity2132
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567564323739914242
-
I just falsified your claim of dependence on presupposition, by stating like all
I just falsified your claim of dependence on presupposition, by stating like all theories the evidence is in survival by demonstration in application.
Now, I know you’re not terribly bright, and you’re having to google ideas and rely on others for repartee, but this is boring.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 17:21:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567563667490619399
Reply addressees: @thebigfatplan @KWintie @CRSerenity2132
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567561989706088449
-
Basically, if math is true for the mathematically reducible, then operationalism
Basically, if math is true for the mathematically reducible, then operationalism is true even for the non-mathematically, and non-computationally, reducible.
Ordinary operational language in promissory form is equivalent to universal mathematical falsification.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 17:11:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567561245359841286
Reply addressees: @thebigfatplan @KWintie @CRSerenity2132
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567559619811098624
-
1. Is the completeness of this paradigm possible? 2. only testimony to testifiab
1. Is the completeness of this paradigm possible? 2. only testimony to testifiables is open to truth claim. 3. therefore is there anything that one can testify to that violates this logic?
Same as math, except everything possible is operationally but not mathematically reducible.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 17:09:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567560781381632003
Reply addressees: @thebigfatplan @KWintie @CRSerenity2132
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567559619811098624
-
So you’re saying I don’t understand the concept of falsifiability despite spendi
So you’re saying I don’t understand the concept of falsifiability despite spending almost thirty years completing the Popper > Bartley > Kuhn project by uniting it with economic and legal theory thereby uniting the physical and behavioral sciences?
Ok. You folks are cute really.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 15:50:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567540716565307392
Reply addressees: @A2thaKay @KWintie
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567539975184609281
-
The only value in social media is in running experiments that test the theory, a
The only value in social media is in running experiments that test the theory, and assist in finding possible holes in it. In this case I’m testing someone else’s theory and developing criteria for possible adjudication in court.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 15:25:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567534630361874432
Reply addressees: @A2thaKay @KWintie
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567533603655155712
-
There is a reason Socrates tried to leave Athens, Churchmen retreated to Scripto
There is a reason Socrates tried to leave Athens, Churchmen retreated to Scriptoria, Hume and Neitzche to near hermitage, and philosophers and theorists to life at the Academy. It’s because with sufficient knowledge of man – the *near* futility of our efforts is overwhelming. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1567522239632867329
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 14:42:04 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567523602848792579
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1567522239632867329
-
That is profoundly stupid: from mathematics, to logic, to operations, to ordinar
That is profoundly stupid: from mathematics, to logic, to operations, to ordinary language, to narrative,fiction, fictionalism, and deceit, all are just variations on language(logic of continuous recursive disambiguation) with increasing dimensions of reference. Theory=Statement.
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 14:21:40 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567518469922381824
Reply addressees: @KWintie
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567517767187795969
-
Now, we CAN falsify cardinal, ordinal, set, computational and operational claims
Now, we CAN falsify cardinal, ordinal, set, computational and operational claims because of differences in reducibility of each of those domains. ie: mathematical reducibility is small, computational is larger, operational is larger, and verbal (set) is even larger). 😉
Source date (UTC): 2022-09-07 14:17:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567517443127447552
Reply addressees: @KWintie
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1567515897966874625