Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • September 21st, 2018 6:45 PM —“One of things that led me to follow you and the

    September 21st, 2018 6:45 PM

    —“One of things that led me to follow you and the other guys on here is the way in which your use of operational speech is clear and simple to understand. But what I’ve learned through trying to contribute a few comments here and there, is that writing in this way is not easy. There’s a cost involved. Constructing arguments operationally and ensuring they are free from error, bias etc takes time and effort (and I make no pretense of being any good at this yet). No wonder the left takes the cheap and easy route of using lies.”—- Andy Lunn

  • September 21st, 2018 11:46 AM AGAIN. USE OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE TO AVOID THE FALLA

    September 21st, 2018 11:46 AM AGAIN. USE OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE TO AVOID THE FALLACIES OF IDEALISM, CONFLATION, AND PRETENSE OF KNOWLEDGE [We] can speak truthfully, we can claim others speak truthfully, but it is our speech about existence, or experience, or the imaginary that ‘is true’ (coherent, consistent, correspondent, operational, and complete) or not. No such thing as ‘truth’ exists that is not a promise by someone that a statement is coherent, consistent, correspondent, operational, and complete ENOUGH to satisfy the demand for infallibility. Existence just exists. It’s state continuously changes (entropy). We can make statements about some state or change in state over some period of time (periodicity, frame), but only our promise to the coherence, consistency, correspondence, operational possibility, and completeness can be claimed as ‘true’ because that is the meaning of truth: testimony. As to logic, logical must and only can me, constant relations (consistency) between two or more properties (identity) or states (logic). (Because that is all that neurons do: test for differences or their absence as differences.) Therefore a statement is falsifiable. It is false (certain), true (possible), or undecidable (unknown). if a statement is undecidable, then deductions from it are undecidable, but in formal logic we state that the undecidable is to be treated as false.

  • September 21st, 2018 11:11 AM LANGUAGE IS CALCULATING WITH MORE DIMENSIONS (wort

    September 21st, 2018 11:11 AM LANGUAGE IS CALCULATING WITH MORE DIMENSIONS
    (worth repeating) [W]e tend to think of mathematics as calculation (it is) but language is also a form of calculation, and we have just (or I have just) begun to understand that language is a means of calculating (transforming inputs and outputs) in a market (competition) for signaling and influence, that produces continuous improvements in knowledge IF not impeded by error (supernatural, magical, ideal) all of which prohibit precision and increase error counter to the natural, scientific, and operational descriptions.

  • CONFLATION. WE CAN’T HELP IT. HENCE OPERATIONALISM. —“Ontological confusions:

    CONFLATION. WE CAN’T HELP IT. HENCE OPERATIONALISM.

    —“Ontological confusions:

    Both children and adults tend to confuse aspects of reality

    (i.e., “core knowledge”) in systematic ways (Lindeman,

    Svedholm-Hakkinen & Lipsanen, 2015). Any category mistake

    involving property differences between animate and

    inanimate or mental and physical, as examples, constitutes

    an ontological confusion. Consider the belief that prayers

    have the capacity to heal (i.e., spiritual healing). Such

    beliefs are taken to result from conflation of mental phenomenon,which are subjective and immaterial, and physicalphenomenon, which are objective and material (Lindeman,Svedholm-Hakkinen & Lipsanen, 2015). On a dual-processview, ontological confusions constitute a failure to reflecton and inhibit such intuitive ontological confusions (Svedholm& Lindeman, 2013). Ontological confusions may also be supported by a bias toward believing the literal truth of

    statements. Thus, ontological confusions are conceptually

    related to both detection and response bias as mechanisms

    that may underlie bullshit receptivity. As such, the propensity

    to endorse ontological confusions should be linked to

    higher levels of bullshit receptivity.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-20 07:55:00 UTC

  • JOSLIN ON GENERATIVE ANTHROPOLOGY (POSTMODERN) Truth pertains to truth bearance

    JOSLIN ON GENERATIVE ANTHROPOLOGY (POSTMODERN)

    Truth pertains to truth bearance (transmission of a claim which can be tested for “true-falseness”.)

    Meaning pertains to coherence to a frame.

    They can coexist, but truth pertains only to coherence with the existential frame (does it exist). Because it has this quality of coherence (to existence), we can ignore the limit (that it is limited to the existential frame) and then argue it on the merits of meaning.

    Meaningful statements may or may not be truth carriers – declarations on the state of affairs of existence, by definition, must carry truth or they are not declarations on the state of affairs of existence… they are not declarative statements.

    The declarative and truth pertain to one frame – that being the existential frame (does it exist or not).

    Dismissing this limit is what seals the opportunity to lie.

    ====

    To Expand on what Bill Said:

    Truth: the one most parsimonious frame of continuous, complet decidability.

    Gans is a marxist postmodernist in the french model, picking up after girard, and combining his ‘memes’ with chomsky’s generative grammar. Otherwise its just pete and repeat.

    The authoritarians cant use truth. The anti-darwinists can’t use truth. The irreciprocalists can’t use truth, so they follow the social constructionist method, which Girard argues is effectively a ‘frame war’ where parties compete for the best lies.

    Since such frames are not decidable only internally coherent (not even consistent), and not correspondent, there is no method of defeating them except by either superior lies (better market service of fantasy), or truth and law.

    Since truth is decidable and law is decidable it is possible to prosecute all frames other than truth, through coherence, consistency, correspondence, rationality, reciprocity and completeness, and it’s good.

    Nothing that can be produced by fraud cannot be produced by truthful contract. SO the only reason to lie is to avoid reciprocity and contract.

    Feminine justificationism of anything. Male adjudication of anything. conformity and comfort, truth and discomfort.

    -Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-19 17:53:00 UTC

  • Idiomatic and Ostensive vs Imperative and Declarative.

    “Privileging the Meaningful Over the Truthful Allows One to Discount the Declarative and Secure the Opportunity to Lie.”

    by Bill Joslin (genius) [I]n Ganz’s terms, Generative Anthropology is idiomatic and ostensive (also speculative) whereas Propertarianism is imperative and declarative. What allows for the apparent contradictions is not accounting for the inquisitive (questions as a distinct set opposed to a subset of the imperative). Identifying what question one attempts to answer distinguishes the meaningful from the truthful and why these are not always interchangeable.Privileging the meaningful over the truthful allows one to discount the declarative and secure the opportunity to lie. ( CD: color me awed )

  • Idiomatic and Ostensive vs Imperative and Declarative.

    “Privileging the Meaningful Over the Truthful Allows One to Discount the Declarative and Secure the Opportunity to Lie.”

    by Bill Joslin (genius) [I]n Ganz’s terms, Generative Anthropology is idiomatic and ostensive (also speculative) whereas Propertarianism is imperative and declarative. What allows for the apparent contradictions is not accounting for the inquisitive (questions as a distinct set opposed to a subset of the imperative). Identifying what question one attempts to answer distinguishes the meaningful from the truthful and why these are not always interchangeable.Privileging the meaningful over the truthful allows one to discount the declarative and secure the opportunity to lie. ( CD: color me awed )

  • Joslin on Generative Anthropology (postmodern)

    September 19th, 2018 5:53 PM JOSLIN ON GENERATIVE ANTHROPOLOGY (POSTMODERN)

    [T]ruth pertains to truth bearance (transmission of a claim which can be tested for “true-falseness”.) Meaning pertains to coherence to a frame. They can coexist, but truth pertains only to coherence with the existential frame (does it exist). Because it has this quality of coherence (to existence), we can ignore the limit (that it is limited to the existential frame) and then argue it on the merits of meaning. Meaningful statements may or may not be truth carriers – declarations on the state of affairs of existence, by definition, must carry truth or they are not declarations on the state of affairs of existence… they are not declarative statements. The declarative and truth pertain to one frame – that being the existential frame (does it exist or not). Dismissing this limit is what seals the opportunity to lie.

    ==== To Expand on what Bill Said: Truth: the one most parsimonious frame of continuous, complet decidability. Gans is a marxist postmodernist in the french model, picking up after girard, and combining his ‘memes’ with chomsky’s generative grammar. Otherwise its just pete and repeat. The authoritarians cant use truth. The anti-darwinists can’t use truth. The irreciprocalists can’t use truth, so they follow the social constructionist method, which Girard argues is effectively a ‘frame war’ where parties compete for the best lies. Since such frames are not decidable only internally coherent (not even consistent), and not correspondent, there is no method of defeating them except by either superior lies (better market service of fantasy), or truth and law. Since truth is decidable and law is decidable it is possible to prosecute all frames other than truth, through coherence, consistency, correspondence, rationality, reciprocity and completeness, and it’s good. Nothing that can be produced by fraud cannot be produced by truthful contract. SO the only reason to lie is to avoid reciprocity and contract. Feminine justificationism of anything. Male adjudication of anything. conformity and comfort, truth and discomfort. -Curt

  • Joslin on Generative Anthropology (postmodern)

    September 19th, 2018 5:53 PM JOSLIN ON GENERATIVE ANTHROPOLOGY (POSTMODERN)

    [T]ruth pertains to truth bearance (transmission of a claim which can be tested for “true-falseness”.) Meaning pertains to coherence to a frame. They can coexist, but truth pertains only to coherence with the existential frame (does it exist). Because it has this quality of coherence (to existence), we can ignore the limit (that it is limited to the existential frame) and then argue it on the merits of meaning. Meaningful statements may or may not be truth carriers – declarations on the state of affairs of existence, by definition, must carry truth or they are not declarations on the state of affairs of existence… they are not declarative statements. The declarative and truth pertain to one frame – that being the existential frame (does it exist or not). Dismissing this limit is what seals the opportunity to lie.

    ==== To Expand on what Bill Said: Truth: the one most parsimonious frame of continuous, complet decidability. Gans is a marxist postmodernist in the french model, picking up after girard, and combining his ‘memes’ with chomsky’s generative grammar. Otherwise its just pete and repeat. The authoritarians cant use truth. The anti-darwinists can’t use truth. The irreciprocalists can’t use truth, so they follow the social constructionist method, which Girard argues is effectively a ‘frame war’ where parties compete for the best lies. Since such frames are not decidable only internally coherent (not even consistent), and not correspondent, there is no method of defeating them except by either superior lies (better market service of fantasy), or truth and law. Since truth is decidable and law is decidable it is possible to prosecute all frames other than truth, through coherence, consistency, correspondence, rationality, reciprocity and completeness, and it’s good. Nothing that can be produced by fraud cannot be produced by truthful contract. SO the only reason to lie is to avoid reciprocity and contract. Feminine justificationism of anything. Male adjudication of anything. conformity and comfort, truth and discomfort. -Curt

  • LET ME HELP: UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS OF ART DIMENSIONS OF MEASUREMENT (repost)

    LET ME HELP: UNDERSTANDING THE BASICS OF ART

    DIMENSIONS OF MEASUREMENT

    (repost)

    There are three dimensions of art criticism:

    – Craftsmanship (includes materials)

    – Design (the play of order(composition) and bounty(beauty) and perception)

    – Content (the content and values of that content)

    All art can be judged by triangulation (comparison) along these three axis. There is no possible cardinality to art but ordinality can be achieved by recursive triangulation.

    ALL ART BEGINS WITH MONUMENTAL ARCHITECTURE AND DEVOLVES TO DECORATION AND HANDCRAFTS

    – Monumental Architecture is self selecting due to cost.

    – Monumental Sculpture is self selecting due to cost.

    – Monumental Painting is self selecting due to cost.

    – Life Size Representationalism (not photorealism) in painting is self selecting due to cost (hours).

    HOWEVER

    – Painting, Print, and Photography are not self selecting.

    They are middle, working, and lower class substitutes for monuments.

    – Even for the upper middle and upper class, and out-of-sight class, the few pieces of quality art that are canon (mentioned in art magazines and books, and references, or which had popular press) are inaccessible. Demand is just too high. So given the high signal value of art (yes it is an extreme expression of dominance), the market has had to experiment with novelty in order to satisfy demand.

    Much of what ordinary people rail against is the same as railing against fashion: for those in the fashion industries (of which display art is a member) novelty has to function as a substitute for scarcity of craftsmanship quality (note my particular distaste for the so called ‘art glass’ industry).

    AS SUCH

    – Monumental works convey ideas (allegiances, heroics, beauty)

    – The demand for low cost high production ‘decoration’

    (a) may form an icon or ‘remembrance’.

    (b) may decorate the environment.

    (c) may reflect the monumental, life sized, and representational, is misplaced in non monumental size (which is what most of us intuit as great work).

    IN OTHER WORDS

    – Monumental work is misplaced in most homes and offices in market (business) and is generally reserved for the political and institutional and aristocratic.

    – Most homes cannot support monumental work and require only design (decoration).

    – Most people are actually not capable of design, or capable of acquiring the monumental.

    – As such the colorful, abstract, the impressionistic, are to homes as type design and color pallet are to print and display advertising.

    IN OTHER WORDS

    – when people purchase relatively well made ‘design’ (abstract, gestural, impressionistic) of architectural size (to fill a wall) they are practicing good aesthetics (not acting on pretense).

    – when people pay homage to the monumental in private spaces, they are practicing good aesthetics. (small engineering drawings, paintings of flowers, well constructed prints)

    – when people pay homage to the monumental in architectural spaces (your living room, hallway, or dining room, or office) you are (a) alienating others, and (b)

    PERSONAL: ALLORA AND I

    We purchased a detailed mezzotint (print) of an elaborately painstakingly made tree that is about four or five feet tall in all, and framed in a wide matte and black frame. This was the centerpeice of the livingroom between two custom made bookcases.

    And in the center of the living room we had a glass table with her art jewelry collection and work. And Allora decorated a hallway with dozens of small pieces of framed photographs, etchings, mezzotints, and collections of remembrances.

    THE DESTRUCTION OF WEST VIA DESTRUCTION OF ARTS LITERATURE HISTORY LAW AND SCIENCE.

    Allora and I were a rare couple because we were the last generation that could be ‘cultured’ – you actually can’t get an art education any longer. You can’t get a liberal arts education any longer (the whig history). The marxists have destroyed art on purpose just as they have destroyed literature, academics, law, and history. It is nearly impossible to ‘be cultured’ in the aristocratic sense any longer. And it was destroyed on purpose by (((the marxists, socialists and postmodernists))).

    WE MUST ONCE AGAIN BE WARRIORS SO OUR CHILDREN CAN BE COMPETITIVE SO OUR GRAND CHILDREN CAN BE ARTISTS.” – Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2018-09-18 11:21:00 UTC