I am struggling so hard with trying to simplify operational epistemology. To communicate such an idea you have to tell a story. And that story is like an onion, with layers from the historical trends, to the available ‘technologies’ (forms of argument), to the the logics, to the three categories of epistemology, to the structure and limits of human mind, emotion, and action. And I am having such a hard time figuring out how to tell that story. Originally I told it as a battle between the english, french, german/italian, and jewish/russian. Then I decided to take it back to the ancient world as sparta, rome, athens, byzantium, Baghdad, Jerusalem, and Egypt. Then I decided to take it back to the dawn of the indo-european (aryan) expansion. (the pre-soviet russians being the closest culture to original aryanism that we can vaguely understand). Although it appears, that the original culture dissipated by ‘softening’ in the west – brecause we largely rule our own kin – and ‘integrating’ elsewhere, and then dying off everywhere else. The opposite strategy of the chinese, which was to wall off their end of eurasia as we probably should have walled off our end of eurasia at the Urals. … And I had to do this historical restatement because it allows me to demonstrate how we have been defeated in the bronze, iron, and steel ages by the same means. At that point I can discuss the failure of the enlightenment due to the multiple waves of counter-enlightenment. The french-puritan, german-italian-catholic-socialist, and jewish-russian-marxist, all trying to defeat the empirical, darwinian revolutions. … But then I have to get very serious and deal with the differences between religion, ideology, philosophy, logic, and science; then how the logics map to either necessary and scientific or arbitrary and meaningful systems (Paradigms, theories, logics, operations, grammars, vocabulary ), then the difference between axiomatic, algorithmic, and theoretic systems of argument. then the various spectrums of decidability we call ‘truth’. And then the various uses of fictionalism. And then how falsehoods are constructed through various methods of suggestion. And I have to continuously defeat our tendency to drop into the black hole of idealism – the enemy – along the way.
Then I have to address grammars, vocabularies, as abstractions of logics, and then … start with operational grammar, and its applications. And then work my way through all the stuff people want answers to.
And … ugh. No matter what I do I feel like I will lose the audience on that journey. Even if I start with “here is where we are going, and its a long way there”.
I mean. Damn. The whole month of October on this. And one frustrating and exhausted day after another….
And no FB friends to vent to… lol. Sigh.
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
I am struggling so hard with trying to simplify operational epistemology. To com
I am struggling so hard with trying to simplify operational epistemology. To communicate such an idea you have to tell a story. And that story is like an onion, with layers from the historical trends, to the available ‘technologies’ (forms of argument), to the the logics, to the three categories of epistemology, to the structure and limits of human mind, emotion, and action. And I am having such a hard time figuring out how to tell that story. Originally I told it as a battle between the english, french, german/italian, and jewish/russian. Then I decided to take it back to the ancient world as sparta, rome, athens, byzantium, Baghdad, Jerusalem, and Egypt. Then I decided to take it back to the dawn of the indo-european (aryan) expansion. (the pre-soviet russians being the closest culture to original aryanism that we can vaguely understand). Although it appears, that the original culture dissipated by ‘softening’ in the west – brecause we largely rule our own kin – and ‘integrating’ elsewhere, and then dying off everywhere else. The opposite strategy of the chinese, which was to wall off their end of eurasia as we probably should have walled off our end of eurasia at the Urals. … And I had to do this historical restatement because it allows me to demonstrate how we have been defeated in the bronze, iron, and steel ages by the same means. At that point I can discuss the failure of the enlightenment due to the multiple waves of counter-enlightenment. The french-puritan, german-italian-catholic-socialist, and jewish-russian-marxist, all trying to defeat the empirical, darwinian revolutions. … But then I have to get very serious and deal with the differences between religion, ideology, philosophy, logic, and science; then how the logics map to either necessary and scientific or arbitrary and meaningful systems (Paradigms, theories, logics, operations, grammars, vocabulary ), then the difference between axiomatic, algorithmic, and theoretic systems of argument. then the various spectrums of decidability we call ‘truth’. And then the various uses of fictionalism. And then how falsehoods are constructed through various methods of suggestion. And I have to continuously defeat our tendency to drop into the black hole of idealism – the enemy – along the way.
Then I have to address grammars, vocabularies, as abstractions of logics, and then … start with operational grammar, and its applications. And then work my way through all the stuff people want answers to.
And … ugh. No matter what I do I feel like I will lose the audience on that journey. Even if I start with “here is where we are going, and its a long way there”.
I mean. Damn. The whole month of October on this. And one frustrating and exhausted day after another….
And no FB friends to vent to… lol. Sigh.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-06 11:51:00 UTC
-
I am struggling so hard with trying to simplify operational epistemology. To com
I am struggling so hard with trying to simplify operational epistemology. To communicate such an idea you have to tell a story. And that story is like an onion, with layers from the historical trends, to the available ‘technologies’ (forms of argument), to the the logics, to the three categories of epistemology, to the structure and limits of human mind, emotion, and action. And I am having such a hard time figuring out how to tell that story. Originally I told it as a battle between the english, french, german/italian, and jewish/russian. Then I decided to take it back to the ancient world as sparta, rome, athens, byzantium, Baghdad, Jerusalem, and Egypt. Then I decided to take it back to the dawn of the indo-european (aryan) expansion. (the pre-soviet russians being the closest culture to original aryanism that we can vaguely understand). Although it appears, that the original culture dissipated by ‘softening’ in the west – brecause we largely rule our own kin – and ‘integrating’ elsewhere, and then dying off everywhere else. The opposite strategy of the chinese, which was to wall off their end of eurasia as we probably should have walled off our end of eurasia at the Urals. … And I had to do this historical restatement because it allows me to demonstrate how we have been defeated in the bronze, iron, and steel ages by the same means. At that point I can discuss the failure of the enlightenment due to the multiple waves of counter-enlightenment. The french-puritan, german-italian-catholic-socialist, and jewish-russian-marxist, all trying to defeat the empirical, darwinian revolutions. … But then I have to get very serious and deal with the differences between religion, ideology, philosophy, logic, and science; then how the logics map to either necessary and scientific or arbitrary and meaningful systems (Paradigms, theories, logics, operations, grammars, vocabulary ), then the difference between axiomatic, algorithmic, and theoretic systems of argument. then the various spectrums of decidability we call ‘truth’. And then the various uses of fictionalism. And then how falsehoods are constructed through various methods of suggestion. And I have to continuously defeat our tendency to drop into the black hole of idealism – the enemy – along the way. Then I have to address grammars, vocabularies, as abstractions of logics, and then … start with operational grammar, and its applications. And then work my way through all the stuff people want answers to. And … ugh. No matter what I do I feel like I will lose the audience on that journey. Even if I start with “here is where we are going, and its a long way there”. I mean. Damn. The whole month of October on this. And one frustrating and exhausted day after another…. And no FB friends to vent to… lol. Sigh. -
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy produces the optimum externalities despite our consent with them. We do not consent with nature. We defeat it. -
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy produces the optimum externalities despite our consent with them.
We do not consent with nature. We defeat it.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-06 11:26:00 UTC
-
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy
All philosophies are class philosophies. The question is which class philosophy produces the optimum externalities despite our consent with them. We do not consent with nature. We defeat it. -
Will You Understand Propertarianism?
—“when your book comes out can you please make sure it’s not full of vacuous complex terminology that doesn’t mean anything. I want to read and understand it”— A Friend So let me ask you. Who is my audience? The people who already agree with me? The people who want to understand, explain, and defend the causes of the excellences of western civilization? The people who want to conduct arguments to defend it? The people who want to understand the constitution that we need to restore and preserve it? The people who want to understand how to construct natural law within that constitution? The people who want to debate other philosophers and intellectuals and prevent another intellectual attack on western civilization by various abrahamists? The people who want to understand what we need to do to win a civil war for our civilization? Or all of the above? Which of those are you? (a) You will never understand all of it – it will take me the rest of my life, and longer if I had it, to understand the implications myself. (b) Nothing I write is vacuous it’s just meaningless to you because you can’t use those parts of it – you don’t have the knowledge. (c) However you can use only those parts you understand. (d) Those parts you need to understand are simple enough to understand. HERE IS ALL YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND Seeking excellence(dominance), over emotion, mind, man, beast, nature, and the universe, western man invented the combination of technology, heroism, truth, agency and sovereignty in a semi professional voluntary militia regardless of the impact on the status hierarchy, and as a consequence, western man required reciprocity, and reciprocity requires markets in everything as the only possible means of cooperation. Markets calculate and adapt to change faster than all other social orders, and as such western man evolved faster than the rest, including, and especially because markets are eugenic, and western superiority is the result of eugenic distribution less burdened by the dead weight of the underclasses. However, we were defeated in the ancient world by the abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction and dysgenic immigration, and we are being defeated in the current age by abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction, and dysgenic immigration. In order to restore our civilization and defeat abrahamism, displacemet, and dysgenia we must only restore that natural law of reciprocity by the construction of a constitution of natural aw, and the restoration of the militia as the distributed dictatorship of natural law. The fundamental insight of my work is the completion of the scientific method and its application to all of human thought, thereby making it possible to prohibit abrahamic deception – in literary, financial forms, political, and religious forms, in this era and all of those that follow. And to license the use of violence to do so. Outlawing all those means by which the west was defeated in the ancient world and this one: not by violence, but by lies, financialization, immigration, and dysgenic devolution. -
WILL YOU UNDERSTAND PROPERTARIANISM? —“when your book comes out can you please
WILL YOU UNDERSTAND PROPERTARIANISM?
—“when your book comes out can you please make sure it’s not full of vacuous complex terminology that doesn’t mean anything. I want to read and understand it”— A Friend
So let me ask you.
Who is my audience?
The people who already agree with me?
The people who want to understand, explain, and defend the causes of the excellences of western civilization?
The people who want to conduct arguments to defend it?
The people who want to understand the constitution that we need to restore and preserve it?
The people who want to understand how to construct natural law within that constitution?
The people who want to debate other philosophers and intellectuals and prevent another intellectual attack on western civilization by various abrahamists?
The people who want to understand what we need to do to win a civil war for our civilization?
Or all of the above?
Which of those are you?
(a) You will never understand all of it – it will take me the rest of my life, and longer if I had it, to understand the implications myself. (b) Nothing I write is vacuous it’s just meaningless to you because you can’t use those parts of it – you don’t have the knowledge. (c) However you can use only those parts you understand. (d) Those parts you need to understand are simple enough to understand.
HERE IS ALL YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND
Seeking excellence(dominance), over emotion, mind, man, beast, nature, and the universe, western man invented the combination of technology, heroism, truth, agency and sovereignty in a semi professional voluntary militia regardless of the impact on the status hierarchy, and as a consequence, western man required reciprocity, and reciprocity requires markets in everything as the only possible means of cooperation. Markets calculate and adapt to change faster than all other social orders, and as such western man evolved faster than the rest, including, and especially because markets are eugenic, and western superiority is the result of eugenic distribution less burdened by the dead weight of the underclasses. However, we were defeated in the ancient world by the abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction and dysgenic immigration, and we are being defeated in the current age by abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction, and dysgenic immigration. In order to restore our civilization and defeat abrahamism, displacemet, and dysgenia we must only restore that natural law of reciprocity by the construction of a constitution of natural aw, and the restoration of the militia as the distributed dictatorship of natural law.
The fundamental insight of my work is the completion of the scientific method and its application to all of human thought, thereby making it possible to prohibit abrahamic deception – in literary, financial forms, political, and religious forms, in this era and all of those that follow.
And to license the use of violence to do so. Outlawing all those means by which the west was defeated in the ancient world and this one: not by violence, but by lies, financialization, immigration, and dysgenic devolution.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-04 20:44:00 UTC
-
Will You Understand Propertarianism?
—“when your book comes out can you please make sure it’s not full of vacuous complex terminology that doesn’t mean anything. I want to read and understand it”— A Friend So let me ask you. Who is my audience? The people who already agree with me? The people who want to understand, explain, and defend the causes of the excellences of western civilization? The people who want to conduct arguments to defend it? The people who want to understand the constitution that we need to restore and preserve it? The people who want to understand how to construct natural law within that constitution? The people who want to debate other philosophers and intellectuals and prevent another intellectual attack on western civilization by various abrahamists? The people who want to understand what we need to do to win a civil war for our civilization? Or all of the above? Which of those are you? (a) You will never understand all of it – it will take me the rest of my life, and longer if I had it, to understand the implications myself. (b) Nothing I write is vacuous it’s just meaningless to you because you can’t use those parts of it – you don’t have the knowledge. (c) However you can use only those parts you understand. (d) Those parts you need to understand are simple enough to understand. HERE IS ALL YOU NEED TO UNDERSTAND Seeking excellence(dominance), over emotion, mind, man, beast, nature, and the universe, western man invented the combination of technology, heroism, truth, agency and sovereignty in a semi professional voluntary militia regardless of the impact on the status hierarchy, and as a consequence, western man required reciprocity, and reciprocity requires markets in everything as the only possible means of cooperation. Markets calculate and adapt to change faster than all other social orders, and as such western man evolved faster than the rest, including, and especially because markets are eugenic, and western superiority is the result of eugenic distribution less burdened by the dead weight of the underclasses. However, we were defeated in the ancient world by the abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction and dysgenic immigration, and we are being defeated in the current age by abrahamic lies, dysgenic reproduction, and dysgenic immigration. In order to restore our civilization and defeat abrahamism, displacemet, and dysgenia we must only restore that natural law of reciprocity by the construction of a constitution of natural aw, and the restoration of the militia as the distributed dictatorship of natural law. The fundamental insight of my work is the completion of the scientific method and its application to all of human thought, thereby making it possible to prohibit abrahamic deception – in literary, financial forms, political, and religious forms, in this era and all of those that follow. And to license the use of violence to do so. Outlawing all those means by which the west was defeated in the ancient world and this one: not by violence, but by lies, financialization, immigration, and dysgenic devolution. -
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/23213488_10155855480282264_67560915
photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_43196237263/23213488_10155855480282264_6756091529797878533_o_10155855480282264.jpg TABLE OF DISCOURSE GOALSTABLE OF DISCOURSE GOALS
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-04 12:52:00 UTC