So in your attempt to produce relativism by the deception that there is more than one most parsimonious consistent and correspondent metaphysics, you claim either a knowledge you don’t have or demonstrate an ignorance you don’t acknowledge.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 22:46:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483571534753116161
Reply addressees: @Apollo33052943 @Jay_D007
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483569168620277761
(…)
6. There are only so many axis of self-delusion possible:
(a) The physical: Magic to Pseudoscience
(b) The verbal: Sophistry to Idealism (philosophy, ideology)
(c) The intuitionistic: Occult to Religion (Supernatural, Theology)
(d) Avoidance, Evasion, and Denial (see HBD denial, genetic denial)
(e) Blame and undermining (see marxism, neomarxism, feminism, postmodernism, pc-woke)
(f) Social construction by Storytelling any or all of the above (environmental saturation, institutionalizing lying)
(g) Hedonism: hyperconsumption, sex, alcohol, and drugs
7. So, given the malincentives to reform in the academy, we must expect at least one generation to die off before we see reform in the evolutionary, behavioral, physical ,and logical sciences (despite some of us working very hard to bring it about.) đ
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 17:56:34 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644753942786855
Replying to: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644751758704966
IN REPLY TO:
@curtd
Q: âHow do you define The Existence Dilemma? Would the universe exist because it is a simulation and also because it is the opposite of a simulation? Could there be an infinite number of factors that make the universe exist?” Itâs not a dilemma itâs a sophism. There are no paradoxes or dilemmas. (Really) Despite talking heads, there are no mysterious processes remaining in the universe. We merely lack means of measuring what is an exceptionless regularity in the universe, we call its first principle or cause: under pressure the quantum background (zero point) has only expansion (entropy-disorder) and aggregation (mass-order) available to release the stress. The universe is purely classical. âMathinessâ is a pseudoscience. (Mythology) Despite talking heads, in a universe under pressure the same competition for solutions to stress will manifest in predictable means. The only difference would be in velocity, frequency and amplitude of variations in the quantum background. In other words, only one optimum set of laws will emerge and they will produce an invariant outcome. Why? geometry limits orbitals (puzzle pieces), and orbitals determine potential connections. In other words, the universe is purely geometric at all levels, and there is only one solution that is survivable, but that solution will emerge in some form regardless of the initial state. Despite talking heads, we have no evidence of whether our observable universe is singular, whether it exists inside a greater macro universe, or whether our universe is but another bubble in a froth of multiple universes. However, we have no evidence or logic that suggests any other variation on this universe can exist. Everything suggests not. There is no knowledge yet by which we can predict which organization of universes: singular, container, or bubbles exist. The computational behavior of a universe cannot be simulated except as the universe itself. In other words we cannot be living in a simulation. Humans have an innate desire for discounts on the first principle of human behavior: acquisition(retention, consumption). This principle manifests as âthe greatest return in the shortest time with the least effort, with the greatest certainty, at the lowest risk.â This manifests in our bodily economy. In our neural economy. in our behavioral economy. in our social economy. in our political economy. In other words, weâre all looking for discounts. And some of us are looking for âcheatsâ. In other words, whether ideas, beliefs, ideologies, philosophies, religions, hyperconsumption, or drugs we seek to obtain discounts on existence âcheatsâ. One of those cheats is metaphysical. It is the equivalent of the hunter-gatherer imagining the undiscovered valley full of rivers, greenery and fresh game. And nothing more. (more…)
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644751758704966
Q: âHow do you define The Existence Dilemma? Would the universe exist because it is a simulation and also because it is the opposite of a simulation? Could there be an infinite number of factors that make the universe exist?”
Itâs not a dilemma itâs a sophism. There are no paradoxes or dilemmas. (Really)
Despite talking heads, there are no mysterious processes remaining in the universe. We merely lack means of measuring what is an exceptionless regularity in the universe, we call its first principle or cause: under pressure the quantum background (zero point) has only expansion (entropy-disorder) and aggregation (mass-order) available to release the stress. The universe is purely classical. âMathinessâ is a pseudoscience. (Mythology)
Despite talking heads, in a universe under pressure the same competition for solutions to stress will manifest in predictable means. The only difference would be in velocity, frequency and amplitude of variations in the quantum background. In other words, only one optimum set of laws will emerge and they will produce an invariant outcome. Why? geometry limits orbitals (puzzle pieces), and orbitals determine potential connections. In other words, the universe is purely geometric at all levels, and there is only one solution that is survivable, but that solution will emerge in some form regardless of the initial state.
Despite talking heads, we have no evidence of whether our observable universe is singular, whether it exists inside a greater macro universe, or whether our universe is but another bubble in a froth of multiple universes. However, we have no evidence or logic that suggests any other variation on this universe can exist. Everything suggests not. There is no knowledge yet by which we can predict which organization of universes: singular, container, or bubbles exist.
The computational behavior of a universe cannot be simulated except as the universe itself. In other words we cannot be living in a simulation.
Humans have an innate desire for discounts on the first principle of human behavior: acquisition(retention, consumption). This principle manifests as âthe greatest return in the shortest time with the least effort, with the greatest certainty, at the lowest risk.â This manifests in our bodily economy. In our neural economy. in our behavioral economy. in our social economy. in our political economy. In other words, weâre all looking for discounts. And some of us are looking for âcheatsâ. In other words, whether ideas, beliefs, ideologies, philosophies, religions, hyperconsumption, or drugs we seek to obtain discounts on existence âcheatsâ. One of those cheats is metaphysical. It is the equivalent of the hunter-gatherer imagining the undiscovered valley full of rivers, greenery and fresh game. And nothing more.
(more…)
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 17:56:00 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644751758704966
I don’t think you mean that to be as ‘dumb’ as it is on its face.
A market is a heuristic process.
All markets are heuristic processes
Epistemology is a market process.
Thought is a market process.
Consciousness is a market process.
Neural development is a market process.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 17:31:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483492175581171724
Reply addressees: @roguebroadcast
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483488824328011778
(Your comment is sticking with me.The reason being, that, my goal is precisely the one you demonstrated: to habituate the use the one first principle as a measure of all behavior so that it’s a natural response. đ )
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 16:49:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483481744238157829
Reply addressees: @Logos_Elect
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483271752000098306
WHERE DOES KNOWLEDGE COME FROM?
THE CORRECT ANSWER
Q: âWhere does knowledge come from?â
COGNITION
BEGIN LOOP
Sensation -> Integration -> Perception -> Auto Association -> Recursion (Prediction) -> Attention -> Wayfinding (justification) -> Recursion (falsification) -> Survival -> Action.
END LOOP
Thatâs quite literally what the brain does when we think.
EPISTEMOLOGY
BEGIN LOOP
Observation -> Auto Association (intuition) -> Idea -> Falsification(Reason, thinking) -> Survival -> Hypothesis -> Falsification (experiment, action) -> Survival -> Theory (reason+empiricism) -> Publication (action) -> Falsification (application) -> Survival -> Surviving Theory (reason+empiricism+market_application – > Falsification (Discovery of Limits)
END LOOP
Thatâs quite literally what we do to produce knowledge.
METAPHYSICAL PRESUMPTION
Those theories that survive, and evolve into unconscious presumptions in a body politic. Until they encounter sufficient market failures to require reapplication of the Epistemic Loop above.
SUMMARY AND ANSWER TO THE QUESTION
Knowledge evolves from a continuous stream of observation of cause and effect from the individual to the group to the civilization to mankind.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 16:03:28 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107644309250565624
Q: WHERE DOES KNOWLEDGE COME FROM:
The final word on epistemology. https://t.co/zViX9AT5Hu
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-18 16:02:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1483469970868772872
@dleetr Sorry, but instead, science and philosophy have been fully demarcated so that they are as independent as science and logic. Even in the beginning the aristotelian empirical competed with the platonic literary and the theological supernatural. I know this comes as a surprise, but the evolution of the logics, philosophy(platon) and natural philosophy(aristotle) have fully demarcated and that is because they depend on different constraints. In other words, philosophical rationalism is a verbal and textual logic dependent upon falsehoods (non-contradiction) absent cost and causality. It is, at best, a set logic and despite the failure of non-contradictino, and the absence of completeness, and the fallacy of justificatoino, it has evolved into a system of sophistry from which philosophers have done more harm in history than good – the opposite of the scientists. We can demarcate all the logics: Mathematics depends only on an ideal positional logic. Althoritmic logic depends on operational possibility. Science depends on realism naturalism operationalism and testmony. Economics adds rational choice and reciprocity. And the logic of decidability adds construction from first principles, completeness and limits. And Law depends on the additional constraint of warrantability, restitutability, and limits of liability – and together they form the science of the logics.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-17 19:21:46 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107639426693334774
PHILOSOPHY IS DEAD
Painful truth: philosophy as other than the study of intellectual history – meaning the evolution of the sciences – is (empirically) dead. So ‘interesting’ is a useful means of evading that fact, where ‘best’ would have in the past. Now: Truth=Science, Preference=Philosophy.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-17 18:16:14 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107639168994843121
This could evolve into an interesting conversation. (a) insufficient informatoin provided, (b) insufficient information held or (c) bad information and bad premises held.
Source date (UTC): 2022-01-14 01:38:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481802993926344710
Reply addressees: @ThomasBenn34 @LMasterBW @SteveStuWill
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1481796555174731780