Agreed. I still find humans wonderful. But again, that’s the difference between philosophy and spirituality (opportunity), and science, economics, and law (scarcity). I think what I’m bothered by is the degree to which postwar myths are far worse in consequence than I’d imagined.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-09 22:18:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458197333125050368
Reply addressees: @dandy_dreams
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458193761788387339
So you see how people who pick up P-Logic, Science, Law, end up applying it to their domains and contributing to the body of knowledge? And people outside don’t see the power of universal commensurability in identifying first causes and dimensions of any given subject.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-09 19:10:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458150011187965970
elegant synthesis. I think… yes, I think I see how to represent that on the table of grammars, by adding problem solving on top of describing, narrating, fictionalizing.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-09 19:00:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458147407884128257
Reply addressees: @MichaelSurrago
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458146888872570883
MYTH AS MEASUREMENT
-“There is a simulation, it’s called literature. You just have to decide to enter it. You have to decide in your own life, how much to re-enact these simulations. That’s how to live a rich life, juxtaposing your experience against those of great authors.”- NF.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-09 15:48:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1458099166089990164
Never, out of fear, or uncertainty, or lack of will, give the enemy visibility into your methods such that at the next opportunity they can outmaneuver them.
Want of certainty among conservatives is the equivalent of cowardice. It is the male expression of female cost aversion.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-08 18:07:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457771700276191233
Reply addressees: @Jimbob12277640
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457770684789125126
JAE: The function of all OPERATIONAL(actions) constructivist (sequence of operations reproducing a condition from first causes) is therefore falsificationary. All hypotheticals are auto-associations with any inductive process merely providing candidates for falsification
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-08 16:43:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457750648120877062
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457746385479032836
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
JAE: Apriorism can’t be true because just as math and logic are not closed, math and logic are just subsets of ordinary language grammar:continuous recursive disambiguation. There is no closure to infinity without realistic application of a general rule to a particular condition.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1457746385479032836
JAE: Apriorism can’t be true because just as math and logic are not closed, math and logic are just subsets of ordinary language grammar:continuous recursive disambiguation. There is no closure to infinity without realistic application of a general rule to a particular condition.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-08 16:26:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457746385479032836
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457746384422117379
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
JAE: His praxeology was a primitive, operational (true) stack-logic (false), of commodity purchases (irrelevant to behavioral economics), that could explain (falsify) a subset of human behavior (rational action under incentives) when presented as empirical evidence. PERIOD.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1457746384422117379
JAE:So given we have learned that (a) there is no truth value in induction (b) no closure (c) all general rules of arbitrary precision remain arbitrary unless tautological (d) all logic is falsificationary (e)then the apriori are only hypothetical (f) and proofs falsificationary.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-08 16:26:35 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457746381431521286
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457746380257218561
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
Jewish Austrian Econs (JAE): (an apriori) Is money neutral? Well, not quite. It turns out there is a lot of lossiness in inflationary money that ends up in unpredictable parts of the economy.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1457746380257218561
TERMS: Grammar, Logic, Justification, Sophistry, Pilpul, Critique, Abrahamism
1) Grammar:
(a) rules of “continuous recursive disambiguation” creating a contract for meaning, and consisting of: A Paradigm, consisting of: First Principles, Logic, Vocabulary, Syntax.
(b) Grammars can be DeflationaryInflationary, where deflationary consists of math, logic, accounting, procedures, etc, and inflationary consist of stories, fictions, fictionalisms, deceits, and denials etc.
(c) Operational grammar:
operational grammar consists of complete sentences in promissory form, consisting of a sequence of subjectively testable operations producing complete transactions of changes in state. ie: ‘unambiguous measurements’.
2) Logic:
the test of constant relations between properties reducible to analogy to experience, internally as identity, externally between premises and statements, or externally between statements.
(a) all statements must consist of continuously recursive disambiguation (b) there is no closure other than tautology, (c) all non-tautological tests are falsificationary. (d) falsification requires tests: internal, external, operational, rational, reciprocal, completeness.
3) Truth:
(a)Truth consists of a claim of innocence, by testimony sufficient for the satisfaction of demand for infallibility in the context.
https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/04/24/truth-testimony-that-satisfies-demand-for-infallibility/
(b) Hierarchy of Decidability: Statements are undecidable, possibly true, or certainly false. All logic is Ternary.
(c) A proof provides a test of possibility: a justification. Truth must survive falsification.
4) Justification:
either (a) a moral explanation for a claim of innocence (b) a false pretense that a proof is other than a possibility (c) and an evasion of the cost of falsification. (d) a fraud constructed by the pretense of due diligency by paying the cost of falsification.
5) Sophistry:
(a) General: any use of loading, framing, suggestion, obscuring, conflating, inflating, fictionalism, or denial, to claim consistency in identity, internality, externality, operationality, rationality, reciprocity, or completeness that does not exist.
(b) More specifically, the use of the three means of fictionalism: Physical: Magic to Pseudoscience, Verbal: Sophistry to idealism (philosophy), Imaginary: Occult to Supernaturalism (theology), to convey a pretense of causality or knowledge that cannot be testified to.
7) Pilpul:
(attached) “The Positive Sell” Sophistry that implies a false promise of freedom from formal, physical, natural, or evolutionary laws by use of the following methods: (first image)
8) Critique:
(attached) “The Negative Sell” (second and third images)
(9) MORE IN COMMENTS….
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-07 02:26:11 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107233409170355771
IOW, it sounds like English but it’s much closer to programming or mathematics. And it allows falsification of any truth claims in and across all disciplines. It’s not ideology, or philosophy. It’s a constructivist logic of falsification.Libertarians think: “praxology completed.”
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-06 17:45:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457041395731075085
Reply addressees: @Dage90 @BobMurphyEcon @Bohm_Baller @billyj41
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1457040687375990785
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@Dage90 @BobMurphyEcon @Bohm_Baller @billyj41 “The paradigm, first principles, logic, vocabulary, and grammar of P-Law produce a universally commensurable system of measurement across all disciplines at the cost of unambiguous terms, operational language, complete transactional sentences, equilibrating changes in state.”
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1457040687375990785