Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • THE GRAMMARS OF TRUTH AND DECEIT (worth repeating) … 7) |TRUTHFUL GRAMMARS OF

    THE GRAMMARS OF TRUTH AND DECEIT

    (worth repeating)

    …

    7) |TRUTHFUL GRAMMARS OF EXPRESSION| Math, Logic, Science, Operations(protocols, processes, recipes), Economics (money, banking, finance, accounting), Law (Natural), History, Literature (including poetry > essay > fiction > mythology).

    8) |DECEIT| failure of due diligence > ignorance > error > bias > wishful thinking > loading > framing > suggestion > obscurantism > fictionalism > denialism > and deceit.

    9) |FICTIONALISMS| Deceit > Sophism > Pseudoscience > Supernaturalism.

    10) |AVOIDANCE| Disapproval > shaming > moralizing > psychologizing > ridicule >rallying > gossiping > undermining > and reputation-destruction. “DSRRGUR”.

    11) |ABRAHAMIC GRAMMARS|: Disapproval as substitute for argument > False Promise > Pilpul (sophism) > Critique () > Heaping of Undue Praise, Straw Man Criticism as a Vehicle for Disapproval > Reputation Destruction > Failure to Supply a Competing alternative capable of surviving same criticisms > Authoritarian Conformity,

    12) |ABRAHAMIC EVOLUTION| Abrahamism > (Adding Platonism) > Judaism > Christianity > Islam > (Dark Age Theology) > Marxism > Postmodernism > Feminism > Denialism: “APMPFD”.

    13) |LONG CYCLE OF HISTORY| {MALE EVOLUTIONARY TERRITORIAL: Fast Scientific Western > Medium Rational Eastern > Slow Narrative Indian Indian} vs FEMALE DEVOLUTIONARY MIGRATORY: Supernatural Semitic counter-evolutionary strategy. With Africa, Americas and Pacifica Lagging, and (it appears) Australian-NZ regressing.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-05 02:50:00 UTC

  • “Q:CURT, WHAT ARE LOADING AND FRAMING?”— LOADING: Inserting or removing value

    —“Q:CURT, WHAT ARE LOADING AND FRAMING?”—

    LOADING: Inserting or removing value judgements, emotions, approval and disapproval, into an argument where they merely obscure the truth.

    FRAMING: Inserting or removing narrative into the content to imply motives, incentives, intentions, other than those that exist.

    You should know these two tactics as well as substituting disapproval or approval for argument, as well as all the logical fallacies, and the memory, social, and cognitive biases.

    If you do not understand these things you are an amateur that needs to maybe study logic and rhetoric, and perhaps the list of ideologies.

    See http://retawprojects.com/uploads/politics-ideologies.pdf

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-04 12:42:00 UTC

  • THE GRAMMARS AND THEIR FRAMES (important) Theology readers, vs philosophy reader

    THE GRAMMARS AND THEIR FRAMES

    (important)

    Theology readers, vs philosophy readers, vs literature readers, vs historians, vs biologists, vvs jurists, s economists, vs physicist, vs programmers, vs mathematicians.

    Teach: Arts, Technologies, Economies, Laws, and Wars.

    In other words DEMONSTRATED history, not REPORTED history. Or stated differently, theology, philosophy, literature, and history, are just as vulnerable to REPORTING BIAS as are the pseudosciences of metaphysics, psychology, sociology, and ‘political science’.

    What’s the difference, and why have the pseudosciences (reportings) of the written word been so damaging compared to the law, sciences, logics, and mathematics?

    Lack of agency.

    Utility of coercion.

    Utility of deceit.

    -Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-04 09:47:00 UTC

  • Close, but It’s Not Math, but Algorithmic

    CLOSE, BUT IT”S NOT JUST MATH, BUT ALGORITHMIC (OPERATIONAL).

    —“My sense is that Curt is more mathematically and scientifically oriented than he is literarily oriented. His syntax is almost algebraic at times.”— Joel Harvey

    That’s correct. I actually write in programmatic statements just like we write software. So

    |PARADIGMS(GRAMMARS)| Fictional (inflationary) > Literary(Meaningful) > testimonial(descriptive) > Algorithmic (programmatic, operations) > Scientific (correlative, statistical) > Logical (sets) > Mathematical (units).

    In fact, my writing looks almost identical to my pseudocode. I was taught in the era where we wrote pseudocode (outline in english) first to think through the logic, and in doing so write documentation, then to write the code itself (transactions). So yes, that is why you see what you see. And it is why I understood the possibility of algorithmic language of law…. So there you go. Like I said. The reason I was able to complete Hayek’s program i is because I was born AFTER Turing and hayek was born BEFORE Turing. Now if I could just explain to all Austrians that austrian econ is the LAW of Economics rather than economics proper, they would understand both their discipline and what I have done with it.

  • Close, but It’s Not Math, but Algorithmic

    CLOSE, BUT IT”S NOT JUST MATH, BUT ALGORITHMIC (OPERATIONAL).

    —“My sense is that Curt is more mathematically and scientifically oriented than he is literarily oriented. His syntax is almost algebraic at times.”— Joel Harvey

    That’s correct. I actually write in programmatic statements just like we write software. So

    |PARADIGMS(GRAMMARS)| Fictional (inflationary) > Literary(Meaningful) > testimonial(descriptive) > Algorithmic (programmatic, operations) > Scientific (correlative, statistical) > Logical (sets) > Mathematical (units).

    In fact, my writing looks almost identical to my pseudocode. I was taught in the era where we wrote pseudocode (outline in english) first to think through the logic, and in doing so write documentation, then to write the code itself (transactions). So yes, that is why you see what you see. And it is why I understood the possibility of algorithmic language of law…. So there you go. Like I said. The reason I was able to complete Hayek’s program i is because I was born AFTER Turing and hayek was born BEFORE Turing. Now if I could just explain to all Austrians that austrian econ is the LAW of Economics rather than economics proper, they would understand both their discipline and what I have done with it.

  • Это просто. Нам нужно больше русской Истины в нашей культуре и в России больше н

    Это просто. Нам нужно больше русской Истины в нашей культуре и в России больше нашего Истинного Тестирования в их.

    Eto prosto. Nam nuzhno bol’she russkoy Istiny v nashey kul’ture i v Rossii bol’she nashego Istinnogo Testirovaniya v ikh.

    Es ist einfach. Wir brauchen mehr russische Wahrheit in unserer Kultur und Russland mehr von unserer Wahrheitsfindung in ihrer.

    It’s simple. We need more Russian Truth in our culture and Russia more of our Truth Telling in theirs.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-12-01 09:45:00 UTC

  • Your choice of grammar (paradigm) tells us how you understand yourself in relati

    Your choice of grammar (paradigm) tells us how you understand yourself in relation to others.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-30 19:14:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1068584164641918976

  • “Personally I think a semantically commensurable language creates a problem of c

    —“Personally I think a semantically commensurable language creates a problem of cost, but alas we must bear costs.”—Micah Pezdirtz

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-30 18:01:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1068565698643980289

  • “If your speech does not satisfy the categories necessary to demonstrate due dil

    —“If your speech does not satisfy the categories necessary to demonstrate due diligence or establish warrantee against fraud, bias, or error, why on earth would I take you seriously?”—Micah Pezdirtz

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-30 14:41:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1068515483136270341

  • “Metaphor: low resolution vs. E-prime: high resolution”—Micah Pezdirtz

    —“Metaphor: low resolution vs. E-prime: high resolution”—Micah Pezdirtz

    Source date (UTC): 2018-11-30 14:32:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1068513181214171136