September 20th, 2018 7:55 AM
CONFLATION. WE CAN’T HELP IT. HENCE OPERATIONALISM.
—“Ontological confusions:
Both children and adults tend to confuse aspects of reality
(i.e., âcore knowledgeâ) 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.”—
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
September 20th, 2018 7:55 AM CONFLATION. WE CAN’T HELP IT. HENCE OPERATIONALISM.
-
is that a rational or empirical judgement?
is that a rational or empirical judgement?
Source date (UTC): 2018-09-09 23:39:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1038934829834878976
Reply addressees: @dagmar_schmitt @MartianHoplite
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1038830620741267457
IN REPLY TO:
@GudistGrug
@MartianHoplite @curtdoolittle Neither is nessisarily eugenic or dysgenic. They are simply different strategies that require selecting for different behaviors. Both have their place, but must be in balance.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1038830620741267457
-
THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY Theology exists because philosophy excludes its fallac
THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY
Theology exists because philosophy excludes its fallacies, and philosophy exists because science excludes its fallacies. Science exists because math excludes its fallacies. Math exists because logic excludes its fallacies.
The question is why there is a demand for those excluded fallacies? Why? Either to bridge the gap between one stage of ignorance and the next, or to use fallacies for the purpose of conducting some sort of fraud.
Philosophy just means ‘we don’t know enough to write history, law, science, and mathematics yet’.
Philosophy serves as young adult literature that prepares you for adult literature: history, law, science, and mathematics, just as children’s stories, fables, and fairy tales prepare yu for young adult literature.
Its storytelling. Stories provide context for history, law, science, and math.
So in that sense, the reason philosophy is largely dead, is that history, law, science, mathematics, and logic has rendered it young adult moral fantasy literature.
The knowledge required at each state of declining ignorance is much greater than the previous.
(I’ve had to master a lot of fields as a judge if not as a craftsman. It took a very long time. I had the luxury of the wealth and time necessary to invest that time.)
Source date (UTC): 2018-09-05 13:14:00 UTC
-
The Poverty of Philosophy
[T]heology exists because philosophy excludes its fallacies, and philosophy exists because science excludes its fallacies. Science exists because math excludes its fallacies. Math exists because logic excludes its fallacies. The question is why there is a demand for those excluded fallacies? Why? Either to bridge the gap between one stage of ignorance and the next, or to use fallacies for the purpose of conducting some sort of fraud. Philosophy just means ‘we don’t know enough to write history, law, science, and mathematics yet’. Philosophy serves as young adult literature that prepares you for adult literature: history, law, science, and mathematics, just as children’s stories, fables, and fairy tales prepare yu for young adult literature. Its storytelling. Stories provide context for history, law, science, and math. So in that sense, the reason philosophy is largely dead, is that history, law, science, mathematics, and logic has rendered it young adult moral fantasy literature. The knowledge required at each state of declining ignorance is much greater than the previous. (I’ve had to master a lot of fields as a judge if not as a craftsman. It took a very long time. I had the luxury of the wealth and time necessary to invest that time.)
-
The Poverty of Philosophy
[T]heology exists because philosophy excludes its fallacies, and philosophy exists because science excludes its fallacies. Science exists because math excludes its fallacies. Math exists because logic excludes its fallacies. The question is why there is a demand for those excluded fallacies? Why? Either to bridge the gap between one stage of ignorance and the next, or to use fallacies for the purpose of conducting some sort of fraud. Philosophy just means ‘we don’t know enough to write history, law, science, and mathematics yet’. Philosophy serves as young adult literature that prepares you for adult literature: history, law, science, and mathematics, just as children’s stories, fables, and fairy tales prepare yu for young adult literature. Its storytelling. Stories provide context for history, law, science, and math. So in that sense, the reason philosophy is largely dead, is that history, law, science, mathematics, and logic has rendered it young adult moral fantasy literature. The knowledge required at each state of declining ignorance is much greater than the previous. (I’ve had to master a lot of fields as a judge if not as a craftsman. It took a very long time. I had the luxury of the wealth and time necessary to invest that time.)
-
The Poverty of Philosophy
September 5th, 2018 1:14 PM THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY [T]heology exists because philosophy excludes its fallacies, and philosophy exists because science excludes its falsehoods. Science exists because math excludes its fallacies. Math exists because logic excludes its fallacies. The question is why there is a demand for those excluded fallacies? Why? Either to bridge the gap between one stage of ignorance and the next, or to use fallacies for the purpose of conducting some sort of fraud. Philosophy just means ‘we don’t know enough to write history, law, science, and mathematics yet’. Philosophy serves as young adult literature that prepares you for adult literature: history, law, science, and mathematics, just as children’s stories, fables, and fairy tales prepare you for young adult literature. Its storytelling. Stories provide context for history, law, science, and math. So in that sense, the reason philosophy is largely dead, is that history, law, science, mathematics, and logic has rendered it young adult moral fantasy literature. The knowledge required at each state of declining ignorance is much greater than the previous. (I’ve had to master a lot of fields as a judge if not as a craftsman. It took a very long time. I had the luxury of the wealth and time necessary to invest that time.)
-
The Poverty of Philosophy
September 5th, 2018 1:14 PM THE POVERTY OF PHILOSOPHY [T]heology exists because philosophy excludes its fallacies, and philosophy exists because science excludes its falsehoods. Science exists because math excludes its fallacies. Math exists because logic excludes its fallacies. The question is why there is a demand for those excluded fallacies? Why? Either to bridge the gap between one stage of ignorance and the next, or to use fallacies for the purpose of conducting some sort of fraud. Philosophy just means ‘we don’t know enough to write history, law, science, and mathematics yet’. Philosophy serves as young adult literature that prepares you for adult literature: history, law, science, and mathematics, just as children’s stories, fables, and fairy tales prepare you for young adult literature. Its storytelling. Stories provide context for history, law, science, and math. So in that sense, the reason philosophy is largely dead, is that history, law, science, mathematics, and logic has rendered it young adult moral fantasy literature. The knowledge required at each state of declining ignorance is much greater than the previous. (I’ve had to master a lot of fields as a judge if not as a craftsman. It took a very long time. I had the luxury of the wealth and time necessary to invest that time.)
-
Nietzsche vs Doolittle
September 5th, 2018 9:47 AM NIETZSCHE VS DOOLITTLE : Critique vs Science. Value vs Truth. Inspiration vs Institutions. I need to address this issue again for the little boys in the audience. What I take from Nietzsche is his attack on supernaturalism, and submission, and his attempt to restore classicism – which is also what I am also trying to do: discover our origins (I have), and solve the institutional problem (i think I have) of restoring them. Nietzsche created a Critique of semitic religion, and tried to articulate and express the ethic of the classical tradition (heroism, the dominance of man over nature) but was unable to solve the problem of how – just as many post-darwinist were. Unfortunately the abrahamists have nearly won again with marxism, feminism, and postmodernism. And they have won by continuing his technique: abrahamic critique. —“Nietzsche’s thought after Hegel was to incorporate Evolution and to reverse everything possible in prior thinkers. So he reverses Hegel by searching for a way for the Noble to have self-consciousness. He reverses Schopenhauer by attempting to be positive about life and its prospects. He reverses Wagner by rejecting the Christianization of the Pagan mythologies. Of course he then reverses many long held beliefs that were unquestioned within the western worldview such as the necessity to kow tow to Christianity as a religious belief system. … So basically Nietzsche went after as many Sacred Cows of the European tradition as he could”— Kent Palmer I systematically attack all our sacred cows and falsehoods – just as he did. Not for VALUE but for TRUTH. I look for everything FALSE not everything we VALUE. However, I attempt to restore classicism through formal INSTITUTIONS rather than the usual german sophomoric philosophy that is little other than a desperate attempt to restore the ‘woo’ of christian submission by rational sophistry rather than supernatural sophistry. As for ‘spirit’ I see nietzsche’s ‘spirit’ as a choice, and an individual choice, not a truth,or a political movement, or an institutional solution – and I see nietzsche as having failed to discover a solution. And worse, I find his silly german ‘suffering'(struggling) abhorrent – the voice of the weak. The strong do not struggle they just do. Nietzsche was prescient precisely because he FAILED. As did all german thinkers – desperate provincial romanticists appealing to the heartstrings of the pubescent. I see nietzsche as ‘weak’. A polemicist. Like say, Rand, he is a gateway that gives you permission to abandon traditional religion, just as rand is a gateway to abandon traditional political ethics. But they are … childish … works by childish people. Which is fine, because we all work at some level of sophistication available to us at our own stage of maturity. Nietzsche’s rant against his status who is nothing more than what all adolescent men do: express their identities and autonomy as unbound by parental debts, when they reach some level of agency. But in the end, he just was an insightful polemicists that failed to provide a solution other than infinite skepticism and a return to a celebration of life. A pair of sentiments otherwise politically inactionable. Nietzsche practiced critique: he remained an abrahamist. He offered us nothing to supplant the past. And understood the classical civilization only in silly germanic romantic and literary terms – rather than the tedious administration of half domesticated man by the use of military, law, bureaucracy, commerce, and education. Rome was the adult that athens matured into. We are only now, right now, restoring the state of development at which rome fell.
-
THE PROBLEM WITH “LOGIC” 1 – identity: tests of intra-reference constant relatio
THE PROBLEM WITH “LOGIC”
1 – identity: tests of intra-reference constant relations
2 – logic: tests of inter-reference constant relations.
3 – mathematics: operations on positional… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=290463391550558&id=100017606988153
Source date (UTC): 2018-09-04 17:33:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1037031007910809600
-
THE PROBLEM WITH “LOGIC” 1 – identity: tests of intra-reference constant relatio
THE PROBLEM WITH “LOGIC”
1 – identity: tests of intra-reference constant relations
2 – logic: tests of inter-reference constant relations.
3 – mathematics: operations on positional relations, which by definition remain constant.
4 – construction: operational construction (arithmetic)
5 – deduction: deduction from a construction. (geometry/algebra)
6 – elimination (subtraction): deduction by falsification of all alternatives. (fields – effectively trial and error) the problem is that mathematical trial and error is cheap while verbal and existential trial and error is prohibitively expensive.
We are trained in construction, deduction, induction, abduction, guessing, and free association.
But mathematicians are trained in the trial and error method.
In science we practice the trial and error method.
In law we practice the trial and error method.
It’s only (silly) justificationism that construction and deduction have any function, and even then that function, like the formal logics is of very limited value: it tells us only that something is false.
You don’t prove anything (non trivial) with logic.
You just falsify with it.
Source date (UTC): 2018-09-04 13:33:00 UTC