The reason I stick so rigidly with the computational model and existential (material) model is to close the door completely to abrahamism(jewish), rationalization(french) and phenomenalism(german) as means of self deception. The computational and material model explains the phenomenological. With it we can discuss the phenomenological without attributing CAUSATION TO IT. Our experiential world is the result of the physical and computational. Most philosophical and argumentative systems measure the experiential rather than merely observe that the experiential is a measurement (consequence) of the material and computational.
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
Why Do You Constrain Argument to The Material and Computational?
The reason I stick so rigidly with the computational model and existential (material) model is to close the door completely to abrahamism(jewish), rationalization(french) and phenomenalism(german) as means of self deception. The computational and material model explains the phenomenological. With it we can discuss the phenomenological without attributing CAUSATION TO IT. Our experiential world is the result of the physical and computational. Most philosophical and argumentative systems measure the experiential rather than merely observe that the experiential is a measurement (consequence) of the material and computational.
-
I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that we
I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that well – although I might be wrong. But the number of people who will make arguments, and make them better and more accessible than I do is large. I mean, I see this stuff showing up everywhere. The terms. The ideas. The arguments. And the people who have been around for years are better than I am at the inspirational.
-
I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that we
I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that well – although I might be wrong. But the number of people who will make arguments, and make them better and more accessible than I do is large. I mean, I see this stuff showing up everywhere. The terms. The ideas. The arguments. And the people who have been around for years are better than I am at the inspirational.
-
Truth is a merciless, zero-tolerance, weapon.
Truth is merciless. Truth is the scientific, legal, political, educational, and religious means of defeating the abrahamisms. But Truth is not a selective weapon. It is indescriminate – a weapon of zero tolerance. It will destroy your Christianity along with the first generation abrahamic religions: judaism, christianity, and islam, and second generation abrahamic religions: marxism (Judaism), feminism, and postmodernism (Christianity), and fundamentalist islam.
-
Truth is a merciless, zero-tolerance, weapon.
Truth is merciless. Truth is the scientific, legal, political, educational, and religious means of defeating the abrahamisms. But Truth is not a selective weapon. It is indescriminate – a weapon of zero tolerance. It will destroy your Christianity along with the first generation abrahamic religions: judaism, christianity, and islam, and second generation abrahamic religions: marxism (Judaism), feminism, and postmodernism (Christianity), and fundamentalist islam.
-
Paradigms Consisting of Constant Relations
I ONLY WORK WITH AND I ONLY CONSTRUCT PARADIGMS CONSISTING OF CONSTANT RELATIONS THAT REMAIN CONTIGUOUS ACROSS DISCIPLINES In other words, Logic > Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Biochemistry > Biology > Sentience > Consciousness > Reason > Calculation > Computation. So when you ask me “Hey have you hear of X nonsense?” I hear “Hey have you heard of this set of fictional paradigms that are discontiguous with existential, observable, testifiable, reality?” No. Fairy stories. I like fairy stories. But only when they are in fact fairy stories, not fairy stories claiming to be something else. There is only one most parsimonious paradigm. And that most parsimonious paradigm is that which consists of constant relations contiguous across the disciplines. CONTIGUOUS 1 : being in actual contact : touching along a boundary or at a point – the 48 contiguous states 2 : touching or connected throughout in an unbroken sequence – contiguous row houses contiguous vineyards 3 : next or near in time or sequence -The fires were contiguous with the earthquake. DISCONTIGUOUS 1 : not contiguous – intermittent · sporadic · broken · fitful · interrupted · on and off · disrupted · erratic · disconnected CONSTANT RELATIONS 1 : properties shared between two or more referents. 2 : properties remaining constant between two or more states. INCONSTANT RELATIONS 1 : properties not shared between two or more referents. 2 : properties not constant between two or more states.Jul 02, 2018 7:20pm -
Paradigms Consisting of Constant Relations
I ONLY WORK WITH AND I ONLY CONSTRUCT PARADIGMS CONSISTING OF CONSTANT RELATIONS THAT REMAIN CONTIGUOUS ACROSS DISCIPLINES In other words, Logic > Mathematics > Physics > Chemistry > Biochemistry > Biology > Sentience > Consciousness > Reason > Calculation > Computation. So when you ask me “Hey have you hear of X nonsense?” I hear “Hey have you heard of this set of fictional paradigms that are discontiguous with existential, observable, testifiable, reality?” No. Fairy stories. I like fairy stories. But only when they are in fact fairy stories, not fairy stories claiming to be something else. There is only one most parsimonious paradigm. And that most parsimonious paradigm is that which consists of constant relations contiguous across the disciplines. CONTIGUOUS 1 : being in actual contact : touching along a boundary or at a point – the 48 contiguous states 2 : touching or connected throughout in an unbroken sequence – contiguous row houses contiguous vineyards 3 : next or near in time or sequence -The fires were contiguous with the earthquake. DISCONTIGUOUS 1 : not contiguous – intermittent · sporadic · broken · fitful · interrupted · on and off · disrupted · erratic · disconnected CONSTANT RELATIONS 1 : properties shared between two or more referents. 2 : properties remaining constant between two or more states. INCONSTANT RELATIONS 1 : properties not shared between two or more referents. 2 : properties not constant between two or more states.Jul 02, 2018 7:20pm -
Curt Doolittle updated his status. Truth is a merciless, zero-tolerance, weapon.
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Truth is a merciless, zero-tolerance, weapon.
Truth is merciless. Truth is the scientific, legal, political, educational, and religious means of defeating the abrahamisms. But Truth is not a selective weapon. It is indescriminate – a weapon of zero tolerance. It will destroy your Christianity along with the first generation abrahamic religions: judaism, christianity, and islam, and second generation abrahamic religions: marxism (Judaism), feminism, and postmodernism (Christianity), and fundamentalist islam.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 22:09:56 UTC
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status. I don’t think a lot of people will be able to
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that well – although I might be wrong. But the number of people who will make arguments, and make them better and more accessible than I do is large. I mean, I see this stuff showing up everywhere. The terms. The ideas. The arguments. And the people who have been around for years are better than I am at the inspirational.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 19:46:41 UTC