Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • 1-You know, you shouldn’t be hard on yourself for asking that question, because

    1-You know, you shouldn’t be hard on yourself for asking that question, because it’s probably the hardest question. I spent most of my adult life on that question and I gotta tell you it was very hard, and I only solved it by standing on the shoulders of relatively recent giants.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-23 00:14:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976975378681090048

    Reply addressees: @MaganeUsoNoUso

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976972803340607488

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MaganeUsoNoUso

    @curtdoolittle I’ve been stuck on this question and have been unable to find a way to answer it that seems complete: How can we trust our senses are trustworthy to falsify whether or not something is true? Is this simply just a question simply born out of Cartesian trickery?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976972803340607488

  • Mar 22, 2018, 8:58 PM

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-epistemology-of-Austrian-economics/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=036a9167&srid=u4QvUpdated Mar 22, 2018, 8:58 PM

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 20:58:00 UTC

  • 1) If you cannot produce an operational description, then you do not know of wha

    1) If you cannot produce an operational description, then you do not know of what you speak.

    2) Logic consists of tests of constant relations between two or more states by contrast (competition).

    3) The Logics consist of GRAMMARS: rules of continuous disambiguation that allow us to isolate and test constant relations between states.

    4) We have produced GRAMMARS that include positional names (math), perceivable dimensions of reality (modal logic), through ordinary language, through fictions (archetypes and plots), through the fictionalisms (theology, mythology, pseudo rationalism, and pseudoscience), and even deceit (really, it’s possible to articulate the grammar of deceit -the rules of conflation, inflation, suggestion, obscurantism, overloading ).

    5) The logical program is still unscientific (justificationary) since it is impossible to prove a truth only demonstrate (prove) a possibility. Ergo, the purpose of the logics is not to prove truths, which is impossible outside of reductio (trivial and meaningless), but to identify falsehoods.

    6) This is why (a) demands for proof rather than requests for explanation are all acts of fraud or fallacy, and (b) we do not seek to prove anything in science, only demonstrate we cannot falsify it and as such it remains a truth candidate.

    7) The only certainties are falsehoods, and all else is a truth candidate. (Critical rationalism), and furthermore, that other than cost, truth candidates are absent comparative probability.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 10:14:00 UTC

  • My answer to What is the deepest philosophical concept you have come by?

    My answer to What is the deepest philosophical concept you have come by? https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-deepest-philosophical-concept-you-have-come-by/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=1c6f6418

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 04:28:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976676853552381952

  • My answer to What is the difference between an ideology and a belief?

    My answer to What is the difference between an ideology and a belief? https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-ideology-and-a-belief/answer/Curt-Doolittle?srid=u4Qv

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 01:56:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976638593300094976

  • My answer to What is the difference between an ideology and a belief?

    My answer to What is the difference between an ideology and a belief? https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-difference-between-an-ideology-and-a-belief/answer/Curt-Doolittle?share=0e8d0fca

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-22 01:55:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/976638504791834624

  • What Is The Deepest Philosophical Concept You Have Come By?

    There actually aren’t any that are also true. (Really)

    (No. Really. We produce “Wisdom Literature” in , mythological, theological, rational, historical, and scientific grammars: meaning rules of continuous disambiguation including disambiguation by permissible paradigms (vocabulary).)

    Science produces humiliatingly parsimonious knowledge – and all of the universe and our experience in it can be explained as one continuous set of consequences from a few very simple causes.

    In my study of history the number of truths is extremely small, all are knowable, and the number of falsehoods that we have invented to circumvent thought, emotion, and action that correspond with those truths is more numerous than the number of humans.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-deepest-philosophical-concept-you-have-come-by

  • What Is The Deepest Philosophical Concept You Have Come By?

    There actually aren’t any that are also true. (Really)

    (No. Really. We produce “Wisdom Literature” in , mythological, theological, rational, historical, and scientific grammars: meaning rules of continuous disambiguation including disambiguation by permissible paradigms (vocabulary).)

    Science produces humiliatingly parsimonious knowledge – and all of the universe and our experience in it can be explained as one continuous set of consequences from a few very simple causes.

    In my study of history the number of truths is extremely small, all are knowable, and the number of falsehoods that we have invented to circumvent thought, emotion, and action that correspond with those truths is more numerous than the number of humans.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-deepest-philosophical-concept-you-have-come-by

  • The opposition to fictionalism in education will be met with (and I meet with da

    The opposition to fictionalism in education will be met with (and I meet with daily) the same opposition as the transformation from Mythology to History, and Theology to empiricism. I understand that. I understand how badly we cling to the loaded frames of our childhood.

    That places no bearing whatsoever on the value obtained by each prior transformation from intuition and suggestion to calculation and reason.

    Sorry. And history will prove me right.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 11:06:00 UTC

  • Truth isn’t kind. It isn’t pleasant. If you want kind or pleasant go find your m

    Truth isn’t kind. It isn’t pleasant. If you want kind or pleasant go find your mommy.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-21 10:36:00 UTC