Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • Ternary Logic of Social Science

    Dec 28, 2019, 4:39 PM TERNARY LOGIC OF SOCIAL SCIENCE (core) We focus largely on the law but not on the other innovations in the propertarian program: Yes, Propertarianism consists of a set of innovations

    1. Grammars (metaphysics) 2. Testimonialism (epistemology) 3. Acquisitionism and Propertarianism (ethics) – Together making possible strictly constructed law (ethics) But we also have:

    4: Cooperationism, Compatibilism, Cognitive division of labor Which means that we specialize, largely along lines of gender cognition and age, in a division of perception, cognition, advocacy and negotiation. And then we ‘calculate’ by discovering opportunities to cooperate across the spectrum of population, time, and space. So we function as a neural network that discovers opportunities despite variations in our division of labor in perceiving and comprehending the world. And we also have:

    5. The Ternary Logic of Political Science. Let’s look at this a bit There are three states of logic, in order:

    1. False 2. Truth candidate (actionable) 3. Undecidable (In-actionable) There are three options to cooperation

    1. avoidance (ostracization) 2. exchange (cooperation) 3. predation-parasitism (conflict) There are three means of coercion

    1. Remuneration (deprivation of trade, or benefit from trade) Middle class – Libertarian Meritocratic 2. Force (imposition of harm, defense from harm) Upper class – Conservative Eugenic 3. Undermining (ostracizing/inhibiting opportunity, including/generating opportunity) Under Class – Progressive Dysgenic There are three axis of elites

    1. Scientific, Technical, Entrepreneurial, Financial, Treasury 2. Military, juridical, Police, Sheriff, Militia 3. Priests, Politicians, Public Intellectuals We can organize by three axis of elites (cooperate by)

    1. Production and Evolution (europe) 2. Administration and Stagnation (strong:china, weak:india) 3. Parasitism and Degeneration (semitia, gypsies) We can rule by three axis of decidability

    1. Science and Law (europe) 2. Reason and Command (china india) 3. Sophistry and Propaganda (semitia) We can govern by three axis

    1. Markets,Law,Courts, (europe) Middle Class 2. Bureaucracy (china) Upper class 3. Priesthood (semitia) Underclass The ranking assuming we eradicate the semitic dark ages:

    Europe, China, India, Iran-Assyria-Babylon, Egypt Mesoamerica, Semitia(jewish muslim), S-Pacific, E africa, W africa Africa, S Africa, Austronesia The only hard choice being iran vs india and that choice possible only because the Persians were not able to shake off islam and reassert Persian civlization despite efforts just as the germans can’t sake of Christianity despite their efforts and reassert germanic civilization. If something had not ‘gone wrong’ in India she would have produced the best culture with time. It may be climate and demographic curse. But I don’t quite understand what went wrong yet but I”ll figure it out. I think we undrestand what went wrong with persia and germania. And russia, germania, and china are our fault for not lettting russia retake orthodoxy, not letting germany retake europe, and not letting macarthur and patton finish the job of the second world war with russia and china.

  • the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian E

    the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian Ethics, The Ternary Logic of Social Science. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/the-grammars-are-as-important-an-insight-as-is-testimonial-truth-propertarian-ethics-the-ternary-logic-of-social-science/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:04:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265494003245555714

  • the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian Ethics, The Ternary Logic of Social Science.

    Dec 30, 2019, 11:35 AM It’s increasingly clear to me that the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian Ethics, The Ternary Logic of Social Science. Why? Scientists, philosophers, logicians, mathematicians who don’t understand the foundations (grammars) of their disciplines.Scientists: It’s testimony on results after falsification of all available dimensions. The means of falsification are irrelevant. Philosophers: avoiding cost, actionability, informational asymmetry, and reciprocity creating unreality. Idealism is merely confession of ignorance. The majority of Philosophical terms and categories are dead because they were WRONG. Logicians: there is no closure, and logics are only falsificationary, you can’t prove anything without appeal to reality. Stop treating it as scriptural interpretation (hermeneutics). Mathematicians: it’s just a language of positional names limited by the grammar of ratios, meaning that positional names provide both perfect disambiguation by a single constant relation (position) and position can be used to generate endless names, so it is endlessly possible to describe constant relations, where the term pattern refers only to some set of constant relation. It’s not that math is unreasonably effective at describing constant relations it’s that it’s only possible for it to describe constant relations.

  • the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian Ethics, The Ternary Logic of Social Science.

    Dec 30, 2019, 11:35 AM It’s increasingly clear to me that the Grammars are as important an insight as is Testimonial Truth, Propertarian Ethics, The Ternary Logic of Social Science. Why? Scientists, philosophers, logicians, mathematicians who don’t understand the foundations (grammars) of their disciplines.Scientists: It’s testimony on results after falsification of all available dimensions. The means of falsification are irrelevant. Philosophers: avoiding cost, actionability, informational asymmetry, and reciprocity creating unreality. Idealism is merely confession of ignorance. The majority of Philosophical terms and categories are dead because they were WRONG. Logicians: there is no closure, and logics are only falsificationary, you can’t prove anything without appeal to reality. Stop treating it as scriptural interpretation (hermeneutics). Mathematicians: it’s just a language of positional names limited by the grammar of ratios, meaning that positional names provide both perfect disambiguation by a single constant relation (position) and position can be used to generate endless names, so it is endlessly possible to describe constant relations, where the term pattern refers only to some set of constant relation. It’s not that math is unreasonably effective at describing constant relations it’s that it’s only possible for it to describe constant relations.

  • I Don’t Want You to Trust Me, Since Truth Should Stand on Its Own

    I Don’t Want You to Trust Me, Since Truth Should Stand on Its Own. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/i-dont-want-you-to-trust-me-since-truth-should-stand-on-its-own/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:00:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265493073372549136

  • I Don’t Want You to Trust Me, Since Truth Should Stand on Its Own.

    Dec 30, 2019, 9:12 PM (from elsewhere) Thank you brother for the honest question. I understand that when one cannot comprehend the truth or falsehood of a set of ideas that one must trust that the man who utters them does comprehend them – and relays them with his warranty of due diligence in both the truth of the content, and the meaning he conveys when relaying it. My position is that I don’t want you to trust me, since truth should stand on its own. The problem then, is overcoming the barrier of complexity. There are a lot of you who want me to sound like a preacher selling a moral parable. There are others of you who want me to sound like a politician selling an ideology. There are others of you who want me to sound like a general inspiring the troops. But I am a judge rendering judgements in the law of nature and the natural law of men. So we are in a difficult position of you (all of you) one way or another, demanding some impossible test of character. Yet the only test is this: why would a man of accomplishment sacrifice everything in his life: time, wealth, business, family, relationships, and risk ostracization, punishment, imprisonment, and even death, to write down in law for the first time a scientific understanding of his people’s strategy, history, in recipe form, to give them moral license, a set of demands, a means of transition, and a plan of execution of a revolution – in order to save them from the second dark age that threatens this time to not only enslave them but to exterminate them? Who else would pay that cost but one who was devoted to it? Do you have any idea what I have given up to do this? I’ve bet my entire life that I can give mission to a revolution that restores my people to their historical path, and defeats the enemy forever. If you can’t comprehend my words. You can’t sympathize with my thoughts. You can’t empathize with my feelings, you can at least take the evidence of my incentives. We must win. I bet more than anyone else so far that I can make us win. You must only choose whether you trust your own judgement.

  • I Don’t Want You to Trust Me, Since Truth Should Stand on Its Own.

    Dec 30, 2019, 9:12 PM (from elsewhere) Thank you brother for the honest question. I understand that when one cannot comprehend the truth or falsehood of a set of ideas that one must trust that the man who utters them does comprehend them – and relays them with his warranty of due diligence in both the truth of the content, and the meaning he conveys when relaying it. My position is that I don’t want you to trust me, since truth should stand on its own. The problem then, is overcoming the barrier of complexity. There are a lot of you who want me to sound like a preacher selling a moral parable. There are others of you who want me to sound like a politician selling an ideology. There are others of you who want me to sound like a general inspiring the troops. But I am a judge rendering judgements in the law of nature and the natural law of men. So we are in a difficult position of you (all of you) one way or another, demanding some impossible test of character. Yet the only test is this: why would a man of accomplishment sacrifice everything in his life: time, wealth, business, family, relationships, and risk ostracization, punishment, imprisonment, and even death, to write down in law for the first time a scientific understanding of his people’s strategy, history, in recipe form, to give them moral license, a set of demands, a means of transition, and a plan of execution of a revolution – in order to save them from the second dark age that threatens this time to not only enslave them but to exterminate them? Who else would pay that cost but one who was devoted to it? Do you have any idea what I have given up to do this? I’ve bet my entire life that I can give mission to a revolution that restores my people to their historical path, and defeats the enemy forever. If you can’t comprehend my words. You can’t sympathize with my thoughts. You can’t empathize with my feelings, you can at least take the evidence of my incentives. We must win. I bet more than anyone else so far that I can make us win. You must only choose whether you trust your own judgement.

  • DEFINITION: “GRAMMAR” IN P

    DEFINITION: “GRAMMAR” IN P https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/definition-grammar-in-p/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 03:56:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265492074440413185

  • DEFINITION: “GRAMMAR” IN P

    Dec 31, 2019, 12:54 PM “CURT, WHAT’S A GRAMMAR IN PROPERTARIANISM?” (important)(core) A grammar has traditionally referred to a book containing the rules of a language. But I had to put quite a bit of work into ‘disambiguating’ the terms we use in language. The human cognitive facility consists of identification of constant relations between stimuli in time resulting in categorization (identity). The human auto association facility consists of discovering relations between categories (identities). The human memory facility consists of repetition of stimuli or rehearsal from short term memory, to create, reinforce, change, and eliminate constant relation within and between categories (locations, places, barriers, models, identities) The human logical facility consist of tests of constant, inconstant, and unrecognized relations between states (categories, identities). The human grammar facility refers to our physical ability to perform continuous recursive disambiguation using a stream of signals, most commonly in the form of sounds. The human language facility refers to the use of patterns of symbols or sounds in sequence of continuously recursive attempts at disambiguation. A language consists of Phonemes (sounds), Morphemes(meaningful combination of sounds – roots), Vocabulary (words), Phrases (state), Sentences (changes in state – transactions), Stories (collections of transactions), Grammar (rules of organization making possible disambiguation by inference), and Syntax (further disambiguation – specifically when writing). A vocabulary consists of Names (Nouns, references to referents), Name Substitutes (pronouns), Properties (Adjective, state), Operations (verbs, actions, state of acting), Properties of Operations (Adverb). and Approval or Rejection (yes no true false agree disagree etc). Note that I’ve clarified some terms here a little differently than we traditionally do. However (this is the issue) the collections of permissible dimensions (paradigms) limit the rules of continuous recursive disambiguation: The logic of the paradigm. This is why…. Let’s use math because it’s the most simple language we have that all of us share. Mathematics consists of names of positions (numbers), variables (pronouns), names of operations ( mathematical operations, verbs), phrases (expressions), statements (functions), sentences (transactions), proofs (stories), and Approval or Rejection (true false). There are no adverbs or adjectives. What differs between ordinary language and mathematical language is that mathematics (the language of positional names) and ordinary language (the language of human experience) differ in ‘dimensions of permissible references’ to both Names (nouns) and Operations (verbs). And we can do the same analysis for every Grammar (system of rules) in the spectrum of: math, accounting, logics, programming, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, recipes, protocols, laws, testimony, descriptions, ordinary language, narration, storytelling, fictions, fictionalisms, and deceits – and everything in between. And we use the term “Deflationary grammar” for the narrowest grammars (math, logics), “ordinary grammar” for ordinary language, and “Inflationary grammar” for the widest grammars (story, fiction, fictionalism, deceits). 

    Deflationary < ---- Ordinary ----> Inflationary.

    So instead of the traditional hierarchy: 

    Human Facilities -> language -> phoneme -> morpheme -> ...
... paradigms (metaphysics) -> vocabulary -> grammar -> syntax.

    Instead we have: 

    Human Facilities (see above) -> vocabulary -> paradigms(dimensions) -> 
... grammar of paradigm(rules of story, transaction, 
... ... function, expression, operation, names: the LOGIC of the paradigm) -> 
... ... ... permissible vocabulary -> necessary syntax.

    So a Grammar refers to the Paradigm (permissible dimensions of perception, cognition, and action), the Names, Operations, and Rules of Continuous Recursive Disambiguation (morpheme, word, phrase, sentence, story organization) and the LOGIC (constant relations) that limit consistency, correspondence, coherence, and completeness. So in P we use a ‘grammar’ to refer to the Vocabulary, logic, syntax of a paradigm. And when we use the term “the Grammars’ we mean the spectrum And Operational Grammar or Testimony is a Deflationary Grammar: a Deflation (constraint upon) ordinary language grammar, limiting it to a single point of view, absent the verb to be, using complete promissory sentences, describing a series of operations (human actions), resulting in testable transactions (sentence), and sets of transactions (testimony).

  • DEFINITION: “GRAMMAR” IN P

    Dec 31, 2019, 12:54 PM “CURT, WHAT’S A GRAMMAR IN PROPERTARIANISM?” (important)(core) A grammar has traditionally referred to a book containing the rules of a language. But I had to put quite a bit of work into ‘disambiguating’ the terms we use in language. The human cognitive facility consists of identification of constant relations between stimuli in time resulting in categorization (identity). The human auto association facility consists of discovering relations between categories (identities). The human memory facility consists of repetition of stimuli or rehearsal from short term memory, to create, reinforce, change, and eliminate constant relation within and between categories (locations, places, barriers, models, identities) The human logical facility consist of tests of constant, inconstant, and unrecognized relations between states (categories, identities). The human grammar facility refers to our physical ability to perform continuous recursive disambiguation using a stream of signals, most commonly in the form of sounds. The human language facility refers to the use of patterns of symbols or sounds in sequence of continuously recursive attempts at disambiguation. A language consists of Phonemes (sounds), Morphemes(meaningful combination of sounds – roots), Vocabulary (words), Phrases (state), Sentences (changes in state – transactions), Stories (collections of transactions), Grammar (rules of organization making possible disambiguation by inference), and Syntax (further disambiguation – specifically when writing). A vocabulary consists of Names (Nouns, references to referents), Name Substitutes (pronouns), Properties (Adjective, state), Operations (verbs, actions, state of acting), Properties of Operations (Adverb). and Approval or Rejection (yes no true false agree disagree etc). Note that I’ve clarified some terms here a little differently than we traditionally do. However (this is the issue) the collections of permissible dimensions (paradigms) limit the rules of continuous recursive disambiguation: The logic of the paradigm. This is why…. Let’s use math because it’s the most simple language we have that all of us share. Mathematics consists of names of positions (numbers), variables (pronouns), names of operations ( mathematical operations, verbs), phrases (expressions), statements (functions), sentences (transactions), proofs (stories), and Approval or Rejection (true false). There are no adverbs or adjectives. What differs between ordinary language and mathematical language is that mathematics (the language of positional names) and ordinary language (the language of human experience) differ in ‘dimensions of permissible references’ to both Names (nouns) and Operations (verbs). And we can do the same analysis for every Grammar (system of rules) in the spectrum of: math, accounting, logics, programming, physics, chemistry, biochemistry, recipes, protocols, laws, testimony, descriptions, ordinary language, narration, storytelling, fictions, fictionalisms, and deceits – and everything in between. And we use the term “Deflationary grammar” for the narrowest grammars (math, logics), “ordinary grammar” for ordinary language, and “Inflationary grammar” for the widest grammars (story, fiction, fictionalism, deceits). 

    Deflationary < ---- Ordinary ----> Inflationary.

    So instead of the traditional hierarchy: 

    Human Facilities -> language -> phoneme -> morpheme -> ...
... paradigms (metaphysics) -> vocabulary -> grammar -> syntax.

    Instead we have: 

    Human Facilities (see above) -> vocabulary -> paradigms(dimensions) -> 
... grammar of paradigm(rules of story, transaction, 
... ... function, expression, operation, names: the LOGIC of the paradigm) -> 
... ... ... permissible vocabulary -> necessary syntax.

    So a Grammar refers to the Paradigm (permissible dimensions of perception, cognition, and action), the Names, Operations, and Rules of Continuous Recursive Disambiguation (morpheme, word, phrase, sentence, story organization) and the LOGIC (constant relations) that limit consistency, correspondence, coherence, and completeness. So in P we use a ‘grammar’ to refer to the Vocabulary, logic, syntax of a paradigm. And when we use the term “the Grammars’ we mean the spectrum And Operational Grammar or Testimony is a Deflationary Grammar: a Deflation (constraint upon) ordinary language grammar, limiting it to a single point of view, absent the verb to be, using complete promissory sentences, describing a series of operations (human actions), resulting in testable transactions (sentence), and sets of transactions (testimony).