Category: Epistemology and Method

  • Input tells you nothing about output

    Input tells you nothing about output.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 22:05:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231339223325847552

    Reply addressees: @WillReturns1066 @stack_dalton @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231339157630390273


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @WillReturns1066 @stack_dalton @razibkhan I don’t read or listen to what people say. I measure results.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1231339157630390273

  • I don’t read or listen to what people say. I measure results

    I don’t read or listen to what people say. I measure results.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 22:05:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231339157630390273

    Reply addressees: @WillReturns1066 @stack_dalton @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231337547860570112

  • The evidence? Lies propagate faster than truth; gossip faster than success; and

    The evidence? Lies propagate faster than truth; gossip faster than success; and false promise faster than falsification; the evolution of religion to theology to sophistry to pseudoscience – Judaism-Islam, Boas-Freud, Marx-Adorno-Fromm, Derrida etc – gets worse with time.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 18:35:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231286462764789761

    Reply addressees: @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231273322412826624

  • “Operational logic requires demonstrated knowledge and everyone relies on their

    —“Operational logic requires demonstrated knowledge and everyone relies on their own available vocabulary. Which reveals something about the speaker, but is why it’s so hard for people without a whole lot of REAL knowledge or the precise means measurements to use (their vocabulary). But once it clicks…you can do it. Just a matter of differing speeds of success. It’s really hard for me. Takes me a while to produce.”— Adam

    It’s hard for everyone. But that’s why it’s such a good test.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 11:17:00 UTC

  • “P’s Operationalism is a lot harder than math. Math is so clear because it’s tri

    —“P’s Operationalism is a lot harder than math. Math is so clear because it’s trivial. P requires much more.”— Adam

    Well you’re the first person to fully understand that. This is why I’m getting sort of awed lately – something is happening because people are progressive much faster now.

    Well as for your observation, math can construct a degree of precision outside of human scales of perception at the very large and very small. But as we have seen in testimony, law, and economics, in human action, the operations available and the grammar to create fully formed, grammatically complete, fully disambiguated statements in P is a lot harder than it is in math.

    So I see: first-order-logic (categorical logic) > math( positional logic)) > computable logic (programming) > operational logic( p-testimony), as the hierarchy of logics today. And in retrospect all the logics make so much more sense now.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 11:14:00 UTC

  • IN OPERATIONAL GRAMMAR, SUBJECT = SUBJECT OF TESTIMONY —“I think “subject” ref

    IN OPERATIONAL GRAMMAR, SUBJECT = SUBJECT OF TESTIMONY

    —“I think “subject” refers to the concept in which the whole of the testimony describes, but through the description of operations by an actor or group of actors.”— Adam Jacob Robert Walker

    Well done!!!!!


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 10:43:00 UTC

  • MORE ON LEARNING OPERATIONAL GRAMMAR by What is the difference between an actor

    MORE ON LEARNING OPERATIONAL GRAMMAR

    by

    What is the difference between an actor and subject? My understanding of traditional grammar is that:

    “John threw the ball”

    Subject-verb-object

    Which you describe as

    Actor-operation-subject

    John is an actor in this case, and the “subject” (as I was taught in school, anyway).

    Another example:

    “The fruit fell from the tree”

    Subject-verb-object

    In this sentence, one might think the actor is gravity, or the wind. Since that is what caused the change in state.

    From a testimonial or vitruvian measurement, though, it would be more like:

    “I saw the fruit fall from the tree.”

    The actor is myself as an observer? And the subject is the fruit?

    Any clarification on terms “actor” and “subject”?

    by Adam Jacob Robert Walker

    You could consider the tree as an actor as well.

    The tree produces fruit.

    But a tree isn’t necessarily following incentives. But rather it’s “act” is a result of nature adaptations or mechanisms of survival.

    I think you are correct that you’d have to switch it to the orientation of the observer.

    I saw the fruit fall from the tree (actor-action), after I went outside to get my mail (incentive to go outside and observe), and the fruit splattered on my driveway (state change on the ground).

    I think “subject” refers to the concept in which the whole of the testimony describes, but through the description of operations by an actor or group of actors.

    by Bill Joslin

    In english grammar the subject is the agent subject-verb-object. the subject “acts upon” the object (side note: this distinction subject “that which acts upon”and object “that which is acted upon” lay the foundation for the initial use of the terms subjective, objective. prior to the 19th century of so, religion was considered the pursuit of “objective trusth” in that one would he changed by the truth (truth acts upon the seeker) and subjective truth was what one did when they sought truth to a specific ends (such as science investigates a particular phenomenon to eventually be able to do something with it). the rise of science (seeking truth to a specific ends) “killed” objective truth – this was the assertion in Horkhiemer and Adorno’ Dialectic of enlightenment.

    by Adam Jacob Robert Walker

    Nice. That puts it in a philosophical context for me. I wasn’t aware of all that.

    by Curt Doolittle

    [I promise I saw] [gravity cause] the fruit [fall/fell] [from the tree] [to the ground.]

    Promise, Testimony, Actor, Subject of testimony, Transaction.

    Use subject or object if you want, but my point is that we need to use “actor, and in the OP that I started this discourse with, I was making the point that we habitually start sentences with the subject being acted upon to provide context, and the cost of ‘thinking’ in operational terms is the extra step required to start with actor instead – which eliminates the problem of the verb to be from the sentence structure.

    If you have a difficulty with eliminating the verb to be, start with the actor not the object( or as I prefer, subject).

    ADAM IS CORRECT:

    Actor, Subject.

    —“I think “subject” refers to the concept in which the whole of the testimony describes, but through the description of operations by an actor or group of actors.”—

    Well done!!!!!


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 09:51:00 UTC

  • SIMPLE DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE (or, why you don’t get it at f

    SIMPLE DEEP UNDERSTANDING OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE

    (or, why you don’t get it at first)

    Jason asks, “is this sentence correct ePrime?”

    We probably need to stop using the ePrime reference and simply teach people the steps to transforming fuzzy intuitive language to very clear operational language.

    The first step is eliminating the Copula (the connector): the verb to-be. This connector says “imply the connection” it does not state the connection. This is how ‘suggestion’ (deceit) is inserted into our otherwise very precise, english language. It’s the basis of all sophism.

    The second step, which may be necessary to complete the first step requires starting sentences with the subject rather than the actor – and this is what’s probably causing your struggle.

    P and ePrime ask you to think in terms of actor rather than subject. To put the actor before the subject in composing your “episode”. Thinking in, writing in, speaking in actors, adds a computational cycle, because the more advanced our thinking the more we’re thinking about subjects rather than actors. And the more ‘generalized’ our statement – which means the more masculine and analytic – the more the subject is the basis for context and the less the actor is the basis for content. So yes, operational language is slightly more burdensome, because it is more precise – at least until you habituate it.

    The Example:

    –“With the ability to protect it with violent defense, exercised at will, on an individual and group level, “—

    Change to:

    —At an individual or group level, [we / they] [can / develop the ability to] protect [it / or restate subject] with violent defense, exercised at will.”—

    Phrase:

    1 – actor

    2 – acted upon

    3 – consequence

    So:

    1 – Repeat with Collection of Phrases.

    2- Producing a Complete sentence.

    3- That explicitly states the COMPLETE transformation (Transaction)

    In other worlds:

    – Actor, Operation, Subject: “John threw the ball (to mark who caught it).”

    and not:

    – Subject, Actor, Operation: “The ball john threw (to mark who caught it.)”

    Language in operational terms is an accounting system

    That’s the secret of operational language “full accounting of changes in state”.

    Phrase (debit) Journal Entry , Phrase (credit) Journal Entry

    Sentence = Ledger Entry.

    Paragraph = Income Statement

    Story = Balance Sheet

    If you begin to see ‘the grammars’ in everything you will finally understand why P is so powerful … and it will, at some point, horrify you with wonder at it all.

    Language is a means of measurement.

    Arithmetic is a very precise language

    Accounting is just a very precise language.

    Geometry is another precise language

    Programming is another precise language

    P-Law is another precise language

    P-Testimony is the most precise language possible

    All language functions as a system of measurement using measurements provided by the human body. and accounting of changes in state in that measurement system. Why? Because the brain does nothing other than detect and predict, changes in state.

    We can either account well(operational language), or account poorly(ordinary language), or account deceptively (postmodern/feminist language)

    I hope this helps because it is the summary of the meaning of operational prose.

    ====

    attn: Bill Joslin


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-21 09:00:00 UTC

  • Operationalism: Testimony using a sequence of intuitionistically(incentives), lo

    Operationalism: Testimony using a sequence of intuitionistically(incentives), logically(speech), and physically testable actions.

    Operational constraints: Realism( Material, Persistent), Naturalism(physical rules of the material universe), Operationalism(description as human actions), Empiricism(observations of results reduced to analogy of experience by physical or logical means), rational choice, reciprocity.

    Science: the production of testimony by under operationalism

    Philosophy: “it’s sorta like that but I can’t explain how”: Analogies. Excuse making. Making stuff up.

    Sigh.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-19 13:52:00 UTC

  • SIMPLIFIED MAP OF THE GRAMMARS How do we demarcate math, science, law, economics

    SIMPLIFIED MAP OF THE GRAMMARS

    How do we demarcate math, science, law, economics, history, philosophy, literature, mythology, and theology?

    (Best diagram I can do with unformatted text)

    ANALOGY AND CONFLATION

    ^

    | … INFLATION

    |

    … … Literature …-> Mythology …-> [Theology]

    .

    … Essay … Philosophy … [Sophistry]

    .

    Law ->Economics ->History ->[Deceit] |->[FICTIONALISMS|

    .

    … Science …-> Technology …-> [Pseudoscience]

    .

    … … Mathematics …-> Logic …-> [illogical]

    |

    | … DEFLATION

    v

    MEASUREMENT AND DISAMBIGUATION

    As far as I know this diagram cannot be false.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 13:14:00 UTC