Category: Epistemology and Method

  • WORTH REPEATING

    https://propertarianism.com/2015/05/29/definitions-truth/TRUTH: WORTH REPEATING

    https://propertarianism.com/2015/05/29/definitions-truth/


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 13:43:00 UTC

  • “What Does True Mean?”– Ok, so traditionally we say “a statement that is consis

    –“What Does True Mean?”–

    Ok, so traditionally we say “a statement that is consistent, correspondent, and coherent.”

    But that’s not really clear enough. So, I’ll expand it fully:

    1 – categorically consistent

    2 – internally consistent (logical)

    3 – externally correspondent (empirical)

    4 – existentially possible (operationally stated)

    5 – rational and reciprocal (voluntary, ethical and moral)

    6 – with stated limits and full accounting. (complete)

    7 – and coherent across all of the above. (coherent)

    The reason being that (a) those are the categories actionable by man) and (b) no category is closed without appeal to the next. and so (c) any statement must pass all those tests.

    Now, a fact consists of a theory of a measurement.

    And a statement consist of a promise of constant relations.

    And a theory consists of a contingent description of causal relations.

    You only know falsehoods. We never know truths without perfect knowledge. We never have perfect knowledge. So all we can do is warranty our truthfulness (due diligence) against falsehood.

    This is the difference between justificationism (i think this because of these excuses) and falsificationism (i think this because I have no other choice that survives falsification).


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 11:57:00 UTC

  • BEFORE YOU ASSUME I”M WRONG, ASK. I had to create a language of commensurability

    BEFORE YOU ASSUME I”M WRONG, ASK.

    I had to create a language of commensurability across all the disciplines so I pulled terms from each where they were ‘the least wrong’ so to speak, giving precedence to math, physics and economics wherever possible.

    If my vocabulary confuses you (which I understand) just ask me how I”m using it. Many words are used in different contexts in different disciplines.

    Don’t assume (like most people) that I don’t know what I”m talking about. I create commensurability the best I can and then define my terms precisely. But this vocabular takes some work to master. Mastering operational language is even harder. Mastering complete operational grammar is … painful – it’s like programming.

    I’m extremely precise.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 11:49:00 UTC

  • LANGUAGE MATTERS English and German, in particular, but indo european languages

    LANGUAGE MATTERS

    English and German, in particular, but indo european languages in general are analytic (meaning low context high precision). English uses a huge vocabulary and very precise grammar to increase precision further than the original german. But that said, german is a precise descriptive language.

    Semitic languages are synthetic (meaning high context low precision). So these languages require a great deal of interpretation, and are open to suggestion, allegory, and multiple meanings.

    Chinese is absurdly synthetic (extremely high context, and extremely low precision), and requires deduction from context to extract meaning. When you directly translate Chinese it sounds poetic. Not because it’s poetic but because it’s so imprecise that we interpret it as poetic.

    The west developed law and science, east reasoning and evidence, and the center superstition, parable, and deceitfulness. Why is it that the semitic peoples choose to lie to each other – and themselves? Why are they so low trust? Why could not even the ottomans produce a bureaucracy?

    Heterogeneity (diversity), Higher aggression. etc….

    —note—

    (Problems of disciplinary cross over. Analytic/Synthetic divide in philosophy, in linguistics(Grammar), vs vocabulary(Semantics) vs. … well you get the idea. I pull from multiple disciplines to create commensurable terminology. Misinterpretation by newbs is predictable.)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 11:05:00 UTC

  • “A lecturer at my university said that you cannot unify the sciences/integrate t

    —“A lecturer at my university said that you cannot unify the sciences/integrate them because different disciplines require different tools to understand and apply them. There is no universally applicable set of tools, he argued. Do you have a response to that?”—Reece Edward Haynes

    Well, there are many devices necessary for measurement at the various scales, and that since the different scales exist because of different available operations at each scale (that is what demarcates scale), and as such a logic (set of operations and laws) at each scale that differ (subatomic physics, vs physics, vs chemistry, vs biochemistry, vs biology vs sentience vs ecology etc.)

    I would say that operational language in the sciences has already falsified his statement, and that dependence upon operational language the same in every discipline and that operations are commensurable (human actions) across disciplines. And that the scientific method(as I’ve defined it) is the same (dimensional warranty of due diligence) in every discipline. I would say that the disciplines could be best treated as grammars, each with instruments, categories, and names necessary for the scale of their inquiry (operations available at that scale). But that those grammars are commensurable in operational prose. Some disciplines are entirely pseudoscientific and some are the opposite. However, most contain idealism, and most violate the method somehow. But that these are problems of language, ignorance, and honesty(deceit) more so than function.

    So i think from the evidence and the logic he’s wrong.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 09:23:00 UTC

  • Yeah. the grammars are as important as testimonial truth, acquisitionism, proper

    Yeah. the grammars are as important as testimonial truth, acquisitionism, propertarianism, and the division of perception/cognition, and the coercion of the classes.

    The grammars solve an awful lot of problems by making all forms of discourse commensurable.

    I didn’t think it was such a big deal originally but it’s one of the more important insights.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 08:52:00 UTC

  • TRUTH AND ART ARE NOT MATTERS OF OPINION BUT OF KNOWLEDGE —“Truth, like art, l

    TRUTH AND ART ARE NOT MATTERS OF OPINION BUT OF KNOWLEDGE

    —“Truth, like art, lies in the eye of the beholder.”–Ben Frayle

    Nope. Truth is decidable. And so is Art. They are not matters of opinion but matters of knowledge and ignorance. Bad taste and bad judgement are both matters of ignorance and ability.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 08:24:00 UTC

  • REVERENCE I don’t revere anything because that would mean I lacked the reason to

    REVERENCE

    I don’t revere anything because that would mean I lacked the reason to judge it without reliance on emotion for decidability.

    There is no difficulty (for me) between talking to a god (which I do daily) and understanding the composition of that god, for the simple reason that talking to a god works. Lots of us talking to gods works better. Just as fitness is a substitute for physical labor, talking to gods is a substitute for talking to our “headmen”, or “Grandparents”.

    I understand that very few of us lack that degree of agency. Which is why I’m trying to find a way to produce the same results without the semitic nonsense.

    Very few people can be entirely dependent upon reason. It’s possible that we can train the majority of the population to have a more rational kind of faith than the evil statist or evil supernatural kinds.

    The problem is finding a narrative that makes it tolerable without making a lot of people ‘disappear’ first.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-24 06:59:00 UTC

  • THE WAR ON NOTICING THE TRUTH —“Once you see it you can’t unsee it. Hence the

    THE WAR ON NOTICING THE TRUTH

    —“Once you see it you can’t unsee it. Hence the ubiquitous war on noticing in general . The time and resources expended to keep people from seeing the obvious are truly astounding.”— Edgar Braintree


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-23 20:29:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/999386843450957824

  • Pilpul and Critique vs Science and Law. Semitic Grammar (Excuses), vs European G

    Pilpul and Critique vs Science and Law.
    Semitic Grammar (Excuses), vs European Grammar (Warranty)
    Once you see it you can’t unsee it.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-23 20:18:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/999384071968120833