When you are teaching people an advanced subject like testimonialism, acquisitionism, propertarianism, or market government, one of the most common pitfalls a professor must avoid, is anchoring the student and freezing his innovations, while at the same time, gently correcting errors so that he or she continues to advance, but does not become dependent upon you. This is extremely difficult. The second problem is getting them past their limits. They generally hit their limits when they surpass the use of the technology (subject) to justify prior dispositions, and instead must now abandon their intuitions and priors – and rely on the logic of the system exclusively without the ability to test against the intuitions provided by their priors
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
Challenges in Teaching Propertarianism
It’s at this point they generally freeze or fail, or grow frustrated, because they do not realize that they have been relying upon intuition, and merely learning a superior means of justifying their priors until now. Making the leap from using a logic to justify one’s priors, to the full dependence upon that logic despite it’s falsification of your priors is difficult – and more difficult the older you are (it certainly was hard for me). So some people progress fastest because they are simply learning how to justify priors, and can rely on testing propositions against memory and intuition. Others progress more slowly because they must constantly reform their intuitions and priors. The problem for the former is that they tend to have become used to ‘easy’ adoption of the technology and instead of incremental adjustment they must do all the work of self transition at once. This is why it is somewhat easier for us aspies because we actually tend to have few intuitionistic priors, and are more comfortable with fully rational or empirical statements independent upon reliance upon intuitions and priors. I can, by temperament, identify who will hit the wall, but not when – until I see it starting to occur. But it is almost impossible to break people through that wall. They must do it on their own. And in my experience, most of them fail. ( Unfortunately, some of them direct their frustration at me. This is understandable. It is however, unwarranted. ) So what can I learn from this? Well, it is one thing to look for participants to help me advance the work, and another to ask people learn a complete system. Luckily there are some people who are not bound by priors. Although very small in number. I can help people by completing the work rather than asking them to participate. This eliminates me as the axis, makes the courseware the axis. But in the end, truth is merciless to priors. And few people are sufficiently transcendent, and possess sufficient agency to abandon their priors – especially those who have invested so heavily in the argumentative justification of them. -
Try Not To Be Cunning. Try Truth Instead.
CUNNING SOLVES NOTHING IN TESTIMONY, ETHICS, MORALITY, AND POLITICS I try not to be ‘cunning’. I try to determine (a) what is true, and (b) what is the equivalent of true: objectively moral under the test of reciprocity. Every cunning can be met with an equal and opposite cunning and therefore is just an expression of taste. By contrast, true, moral, and possible can only be met by false, immoral, and impossible.
-
Try Not To Be Cunning. Try Truth Instead.
CUNNING SOLVES NOTHING IN TESTIMONY, ETHICS, MORALITY, AND POLITICS I try not to be ‘cunning’. I try to determine (a) what is true, and (b) what is the equivalent of true: objectively moral under the test of reciprocity. Every cunning can be met with an equal and opposite cunning and therefore is just an expression of taste. By contrast, true, moral, and possible can only be met by false, immoral, and impossible.
-
Grow Up. There Is Only One Truthful Language
YEAH. GROW UP. THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTHFUL LANGUAGE. Yeah, I understand that religion and occult, and psychologism, and this kind of literary version of ‘numerology’ is helpful to some people but it’s all nonsense. All words are excuses. People act according to costs, assets, opportunities, and incentives. Whatever words they make up to make excuses for choosing among them is just more Egyptian/babylonian/semitic/hindu drivel.If you can’t say it from the chinese philosophers, you can’t say it reasonably. If you can’t say it from the western philosophers and lawyers you can’t say it rationally, and If you can’t say it from the western scientists you can’t say it truthfully. The ‘middle earth’ f-ckers have been a cancer on humanity forever. They still are. The cancer survives. It survives in fictionalism in its occult, religious, psychological, pseudo-rational, and pseudo-scientific forms. All conflation may provide meaning at the cost of deception and the manufacture of further ignorance. Deflation is more costly but provides truth and it is with truth we defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, distance, and sarcity. -
Grow Up. There Is Only One Truthful Language
YEAH. GROW UP. THERE IS ONLY ONE TRUTHFUL LANGUAGE. Yeah, I understand that religion and occult, and psychologism, and this kind of literary version of ‘numerology’ is helpful to some people but it’s all nonsense. All words are excuses. People act according to costs, assets, opportunities, and incentives. Whatever words they make up to make excuses for choosing among them is just more Egyptian/babylonian/semitic/hindu drivel.If you can’t say it from the chinese philosophers, you can’t say it reasonably. If you can’t say it from the western philosophers and lawyers you can’t say it rationally, and If you can’t say it from the western scientists you can’t say it truthfully. The ‘middle earth’ f-ckers have been a cancer on humanity forever. They still are. The cancer survives. It survives in fictionalism in its occult, religious, psychological, pseudo-rational, and pseudo-scientific forms. All conflation may provide meaning at the cost of deception and the manufacture of further ignorance. Deflation is more costly but provides truth and it is with truth we defeat the dark forces of time, ignorance, distance, and sarcity. -
Lolz: Comprehension requires similar units of measure… Your tape is too short.
—“All your statuses make you seem like you are drunk whenever i read them i hear a drunk man rambling”— Anon I understand. Comprehension can only exist as a contract requiring specific performance by both parties. You cannot provide specific performance required of you. This merely means you are too stupid to understand. But do not feel bad. You are not special. There are a lot of stupid people.
-
Lolz: Comprehension requires similar units of measure… Your tape is too short.
—“All your statuses make you seem like you are drunk whenever i read them i hear a drunk man rambling”— Anon I understand. Comprehension can only exist as a contract requiring specific performance by both parties. You cannot provide specific performance required of you. This merely means you are too stupid to understand. But do not feel bad. You are not special. There are a lot of stupid people.
-
Next, Coincidence-ism?
The next evolution after operationalism will be something on the order of ‘coincidence-ism’, where we explore the emergent patterns that evolve from different sized sets of different sized constant relations. Mythology, Supernaturalism, Theology, philosophy, empiricism, science, operationalism, coincidence-ism, and that will lead us to some sort of macro-determinism.
- OLD: Theological > Metaphysical > Positive
- 20thC. Supernatural(Anthropocentric) > Rational(ideal) > Scientific (Descriptive).
- 21stC: Fictionalism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Operationalism.
or or
-
Next, Coincidence-ism?
The next evolution after operationalism will be something on the order of ‘coincidence-ism’, where we explore the emergent patterns that evolve from different sized sets of different sized constant relations. Mythology, Supernaturalism, Theology, philosophy, empiricism, science, operationalism, coincidence-ism, and that will lead us to some sort of macro-determinism.
- OLD: Theological > Metaphysical > Positive
- 20thC. Supernatural(Anthropocentric) > Rational(ideal) > Scientific (Descriptive).
- 21stC: Fictionalism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Operationalism.
or or
-
Information, Measurement, Negotiation
Man as the measure of all things man Actually, the concept I am working on is whether we have everything backwards, and language consists entirely of measurements of different degrees of precision, and mathematics and operations are merely more precise measurements than we are familiar with speaking of. What does it mean to measure? Man is the unit of measure for all he measures. The limits of his existence, perception, action, and comprehension, provides him with units of measure. Measurements provide us with constant relations. All our other methods of measurement merely extend the constant relations provided by the limits constraining the existence, perception, action, and comprehension of man. This appears to be the correct model.