(Interesting finding: our people know they’re lying but they want to preserve the utility of their lies.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-16 14:38:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096780784613113857
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
TRY IT. by Bill Johnson How could one outsmart a reasonable man (like Curt) who
TRY IT.
by Bill Johnson
How could one outsmart a reasonable man (like Curt) who is merely pointing at a truth-testing device? A standard of measure with near NIST-Traceable Calibration. 😉
Curt is not saying he is unbeatable. Rather he is subjecting Propertarianism to the crucible. Bring on the heat.
To attack Curt, is not to attack Propertarianism. That would be a fool’s errand. Could they say Curt are pointing at Propertarianism with the wrong hand or finger?
Could they say you are not pointing at Propertarianism?
That might be more irrational than a Christian *Scientist* saying his cancer and pain are not real.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-16 13:53:00 UTC
-
(Please don’t try to outsmart me. It’s not going to work. Not because I’m all th
(Please don’t try to outsmart me. It’s not going to work. Not because I’m all that smart, but because propertarian thought is a bit of a superpower when combined with any reasonable degree of cross disciplinary knowledge. We specialize in identifying and explaining fraud. Either you will put forth a legitimate criticism or you will make an ass of yourself. I know every weakness in P. They are problems of pragmatic application not errors given the ubiquity of lying, and investments in lying. There are however no holes in P.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-16 13:15:00 UTC
-
(Interesting finding: our people know they’re lying but they want to preserve th
(Interesting finding: our people know they’re lying but they want to preserve the utility of their lies.)
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-16 09:38:00 UTC
-
“There’s another way to sum up your approach, Curt Doolittle—Critical Naturali
—“There’s another way to sum up your approach, Curt Doolittle—Critical Naturalism with an Operational Epistemology requires “metaphysical humility” before the Natural Law. Nature has many undiscovered secrets to be sure, but we use Testimonialism and Scientific investigation rather than metaphysical speculation to gain insight.”–Nick Dahlheim
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-15 20:58:00 UTC
-
SO IN CLOSING, RETURNING TO THE CENTRAL POINT: METAPHYSICS = SOPHISM OF PSEUDOSC
SO IN CLOSING, RETURNING TO THE CENTRAL POINT: METAPHYSICS = SOPHISM OF PSEUDOSCIENCE
Fictions can be used for the purpose of meaning when we cannot model the underlying complexity in mind. Fictions can also be used to deceive.
—“Max Tegmark says that consciousness is a “new form of matter”
Theoretical physics is basically just metaphysics.
Everettian multiverse is basically metaphysics
Bohmian mechanics is metaphysics because it has unknown variables in the math
A-theory of time is metaphysics because it needs new physics such as the ether”—
Yes these are metaphysical statements meaning that they are NONSENSE statements, precisely because there is no discipline of metaphysics, only that category of nonsense we call metaphysics.
In other words, metaphysics is a name we use for a category of sophism we call pseudoscience. There is neither a discipline (grammar) of pseudoscience nor metaphysics, any more than there is a discipline (grammar) of ghost studies. It is just a name for sophisms of pseudoscience, idealism, and the occult.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-15 18:01:00 UTC
-
That is the correct definition, because it is the only definition not conflated
That is the correct definition, because it is the only definition not conflated with other definitions.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-15 15:34:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096432695486398465
Reply addressees: @WorMartiN @Avicebrony @DataDistribute
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096405210988244992
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096405210988244992
-
“Sophism is your mental comfort blanket when “adulting” and thinking get too har
—“Sophism is your mental comfort blanket when “adulting” and thinking get too hard.”—Jarrod Marma
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-15 11:56:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096377611117387777
-
Preferable, Good, and True are different things. Do not claim the preferable or
Preferable, Good, and True are different things. Do not claim the preferable or the good is true. And in general, do not claim the good is other than preferable.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-15 00:59:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1096212330608820225
-
Make an argument or don’t waste time. There is no value in discussion when the s
Make an argument or don’t waste time.
There is no value in discussion when the subject is religion; when the means is sophism; when the difference is cowardice; when or the opponent lacks the knowledge to hold his position.
Furthermore, until there is a competing solution everyone else is larping.
Make a constitution. Or stop wasting our time.
You are welcome to compare solutions.
If you can find one.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 22:46:00 UTC