Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • Just as literature claims only to be fantasy by which we can learn by analogy; R

    Just as literature claims only to be fantasy by which we can learn by analogy; Rational Philosophy claims to be that which it cannot be demonstrated (complete); and Theology claims to be that which is impossible to demonstrate (supernatural).

    As far as I can tell, pretty much all of philosophy proper is nonsense, wishful thinking, and deceit. The tradition broke between Supernatural Theology, Imaginary Platonism, and Demonstrated Aristotelianism -fairly early on.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-08 15:28:00 UTC

  • a) the a priori is but a special case of the empirical, and the empirical a spec

    a) the a priori is but a special case of the empirical, and the empirical a special case of the testimonial.

    (b) one does not define a general case by a special. that would require that we ignore information available in the general.

    (c) one of the great fallacies of all time is that a subset of terms can be used to define itself. The fact that you (and many others) posit such things is not much different from the intentional design people positing things after the discovery and expansion of evolution.

    Testimonially speaking, the record of history consists of DEMONSTRATED preferences, and the literary record consists of REPORTED, and undemonstrated preferences. The difference between demonstrated truths and reported lies.

    In other words, just as literature claims only to be fantasy by which we can learn by analogy; Rational Philosophy claims to be that which it cannot be demonstrated (complete); and Theology claims to be that which is impossible to demonstrate (supernatural).

    As far as I can tell, pretty much all of philosophy proper is nonsense, wishful thinking, and deceit. The tradition broke between Supernatural Theology, Imaginary Platonism, and Demonstrated Aristotelianism -fairly early on.

    There are no answers there. Only the record of errors.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-08 15:27:00 UTC

  • How can you miss the principle difference between progressive advocacy of deceit

    How can you miss the principle difference between progressive advocacy of deceit and conservative demand for truth: RISK.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-07 00:05:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828756412557905924

    Reply addressees: @nickgillespie

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828755610183335941

    IN REPLY TO:

    @nickgillespie

    Disagree strongly w this. Postmodernism very close to Hayekian/libertarian vision of limits to knowledge https://t.co/Bb59cdheCr https://t.co/7CXnElhLh6

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828755610183335941

  • The purpose of postmodernism is to lie so we take risks. The purpose of knowing

    The purpose of postmodernism is to lie so we take risks. The purpose of knowing our limits is to refrain from taking risks.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-07 00:03:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828756151118528512

    Reply addressees: @nickgillespie

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828755610183335941

    IN REPLY TO:

    @nickgillespie

    Disagree strongly w this. Postmodernism very close to Hayekian/libertarian vision of limits to knowledge https://t.co/Bb59cdheCr https://t.co/7CXnElhLh6

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828755610183335941

  • THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY: DECIDABILITY. TRUTH IS A CONSEQUENCE. #Conservative #

    THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY: DECIDABILITY. TRUTH IS A CONSEQUENCE.
    #Conservative #Libertarian #NewRight #Trump https://t.co/T9Nro06ZHL

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 15:49:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/828269423526023168

  • WHY DO WE NOT PURSUE THE TRUTH? (Note: for followers, pls note the use of these

    WHY DO WE NOT PURSUE THE TRUTH?

    (Note: for followers, pls note the use of these series/sequences/spectrum of decidability)(Q:how would the argument differ without them, if I relied on advocacy for testimonialism as an ideal type, instead of illustration by spectrum? )

    —“If [propertarianism and testimonialism] were attractive would it not pull us from philosophy? (convince us?) “— A Friend

    Would not religion pull us from superstition?

    Would not philosophy pull us from religion?

    Would not science pull us from philosophy?

    Would not testimonialism (complete science) pull us from science?

    Or, is religion all that is possible for some of certain limited abilities, philosophy only possible for some others of certain limited abilities, science only possible for some of certain limited abilities, and Testimonialism only possible for some of certain limited abilities?

    If not everyone is pulled forward by each technological advancement in decidability, then why do we see both the retention of superstition, religion, philosophy, and science, and why we see innovations in superstition, pseudorationalism, pseudoscience, and (in the near future) pseudotestimonialism?

    We do not choose what is true for our means of decidability. We choose what is useful. If superstition, religion, pseudorationalism, philosophy, pseudoscience, science, pseudotestimonialism, and testimonialism are useful for different groups for different purposes, because of what we can ‘get away with’ in each discipline given its lack of precision, or openness to fraud, then we should expect people to seek what is beneficial to them with each technology of decidability.

    And that is what we see.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 14:46:00 UTC

  • PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY: DECIDABILITY. TRUTH IS A CONSEQUENCE. #Conservative #Libe

    https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/828269423526023168/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=curtdoolittle&utm_content=828269423526023168THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY: DECIDABILITY. TRUTH IS A CONSEQUENCE.

    #Conservative #Libertarian #NewRight #Trump https://t.co/T9Nro06ZHL

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 10:49:00 UTC

  • THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY The purpose of philosophy exists in the need for and i

    THE PURPOSE OF PHILOSOPHY

    The purpose of philosophy exists in the need for and identification of increasingly precise and therefore increasingly parsimonious means of decidability. A means of decidability remains imprecise, and we call that means of decidability a theory. The most parsimonious theory exists in correspondence with existential reality. We name that means of decidability we call a theory constructed in correspondence with reality, “Truth”. Over time, our search for parsimonious decidability causes the falsification of non-correspondent theories and replaces them with correspondent theories. As such, while the purpose of philosophy is to identify theories with which we obtain decidability, the consequence of the practice of philosophy is increasing correspondence with reality, and somewhat like zeno’s tortioise, we approach the truth perpetually but never knowingly reach it because to do so is to state tautology: identity, the most perfect description that humans can possibly utter.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-05 08:00:00 UTC

  • DEFINITIONS HEURISTIC – proceeding to a solution by trial and error or by rules

    DEFINITIONS

    HEURISTIC – proceeding to a solution by trial and error or by rules that are only loosely defined

    ALGORITHMIC – the systematic transformation of inputs into outputs by a sequence of repeatable operations.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-03 23:07:00 UTC

  • Writing well does not come from the act of studying the technology of writing, b

    Writing well does not come from the act of studying the technology of writing, but from (a) reading ideas you want to appreciate, (b) practice writing about ideas you appreciate, (c) having something to say in your writing worth other’s appreciating.

    We argue and we write because we must, in order to rightly argue and write.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-01 18:27:00 UTC