Category: Epistemology and Method

  • lolz. Awesome. πŸ™‚ But then we have the question of the demarcation between philo

    lolz. Awesome. πŸ™‚ But then we have the question of the demarcation between philosophy, science, and testimony – or is there one?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-17 03:44:11 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/809967400431009792

    Reply addressees: @Kiarip

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/809965033031602176


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable β€” we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/809965033031602176

  • TRUTH PROPOSITION If you cannot eliminate the verb to-be from a statement or que

    TRUTH PROPOSITION

    If you cannot eliminate the verb to-be from a statement or question you are not engaging in philosophy but deception – a victorian parlor game for the educated but unintelligent.

    If you cannot make a moral argument using the costs to each party that are involved, you are not engaging in philosophy but deception – an ancient means of political fraud.

    If you cannot state the meaning you wish to attribute to a term in the context of problem solving, and instead seek to discover its normative ‘meaning’ you are simply seeking confirmation bias – self and other deception.

    If you cannot define truth as you intend it yet make a truth claim you are engaged in self and other deception.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-16 13:03:00 UTC

  • I didn’t think of it this way before, but I swear, that 80% of what I do is deco

    I didn’t think of it this way before, but I swear, that 80% of what I do is deconflate concepts that have been conflated by prior generations. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-14 19:58:00 UTC

  • THERE EXISTS A SCIENTIFIC METHOD. MORE ON (DECONFLATING) AXIOMATIC VS THEORETIC

    https://propertarianism.com/2016/10/01/yes-there-exists-a-scientific-method/YES, THERE EXISTS A SCIENTIFIC METHOD.

    https://propertarianism.com/2016/10/01/yes-there-exists-a-scientific-method/

    MORE ON (DECONFLATING) AXIOMATIC VS THEORETIC

    https://propertarianism.com/2014/04/03/more-on-the-axiomatic-consistent-vs-theoretic-correspondent/

    TYPES OF PROMISE (WARRANTY)

    https://propertarianism.com/2016/10/07/types-of-promisewarranty/


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-14 19:57:00 UTC

  • PROPERTARIANISM IN AUSSIE VERNACULAR —-“The only POSSIBLE method for knowing t

    PROPERTARIANISM IN AUSSIE VERNACULAR

    —-“The only POSSIBLE method for knowing truth is to understand history! Why? Its not f’ing possible to know the truth about the future. It hasn’t happened yet and we don’t have a time machine, yet. heh πŸ™‚

    Therefore. Anyone that claims to know truth and knows f all about history?… MUST start by making up or repeating lies they’ve believed.

    And that makes it very bloody hard to “discover” truth. As possible sources of truth are slowly eliminated, one by one as you come across “believers”. And this is a f’ing massive problem.

    Very few people ask why do you believe, what you believe?

    And as the questions get knocked off by answers? You get closer to truth. Notice?!? You’re asking yourself! πŸ˜‰

    You’re not asking the Gossiper over the fence. You’re not asking the blokes down the pub.

    Who convinced you to believe, what you believe, and what could their motivation be for your continuing belief, or their benefit? ;-)”—-Nick Heywood


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-13 09:19:00 UTC

  • Q&A: CURT! HEY. WTF WITH ALL THE ‘-ISMS’???! (updated with additional detail) —

    Q&A: CURT! HEY. WTF WITH ALL THE ‘-ISMS’???!

    (updated with additional detail)

    —“Curt, I love ya, but why do you add β€œ-ism” to the end of every fucking word?”—-JacΓ­ EugΓ¨nΓ¨ Esteban

    OK – GREAT QUESTION – SO I WILL ANSWER IT.

    WHAT’S AN ‘-ISM’?

    —“-ism Suffix. A distinctive practice, system, ideology, or philosophy”—

    WHAT DO THOSE WORDS MEAN?

    β€”β€œAn ideology functions, like literature, to inspire individuals to action under democracy. A philosophy provides methods of decidability in order to achieve a desired state of affairs. A formal logic provides language for the testing (criticism) of relations for internal consistency (falsification). A science provides a formal process and instrumentation for the elimination of ignorance, error, bias, and deceit.”— Curt Doolittle, The Propertarian Institute, Kiev, Ukraine.

    CAN YOU BE MORE SPECIFIC?

    Yes, a set of related terms, properties, methods, and arguments, in support of a judgmental, ideological, philosophical, logical, or scientific end.

    WELL MAYBE I STILL DON’T UNDERSTAND?

    Using ‘ism’ is a shortcut for a bundle of related ideas. Once you start collecting these ideologies, philosophies, logics, and sciences – just like in any profession – you start to categorize them by common names. Some of them refer to authors “Darwinian, Darwinism”, or “Aristotelianism”, and some of them by movement “libertarianism, progressivism”, some of them by method “empiricism, relativism”, and some of them by judgements “realism”, ‘naturalism”, “deism”..

    So *names, movements, methods, and judgements* largely (I’m sure that there are others.) You can think of them as recipes for baking a complex ideas by different means: *recipes for organizing ideas for the purpose of organizing people in the furtherance of achieving ends*.

    Or in simple terms, ‘ism’ means “thinking like those guys who think that way.” Rothbardianism = ‘thinking like rothbard thinks’. Aryanism = Thinking like the Aryan expansionists in europe thought: what we call “Aristocratic Egalitarianism”, or “Sovereign Heroism”. Where aristocratic egalitarianism refers to the fact that rule was maintained by a natural military aristocracy open to all who could accumulate the capital and fight with the rest. And where Sovereign Heroism refers to the judgements that these people made: they chose sovereignty(negativa) and heroism(positiva) as their balance of judgements (innovation). Just as the asians chose ying and yang for stable balance (stasis) as their balance of judgements.

    HOW DO I LEARN THEM ALL?

    Well, you know, you can just use wikipedia. lol.

    And yes I understand its frustrating for you. But I am working in the realm of a great synthesis of ideas, across many fields, and across many cultures, and across many eras. I lose people in the weeds already. Can you imagine if I went into detail when I was talking about each movement and way of thinking? omg. There is no way to leave all those breadcrumb trails. It’s just impossible.

    So this is just ‘how it’s done’. It”s how professionals in philosophy talk about ‘ways of thinking’. The fact that you can graduate high school without knowing intellectual history is actually kind of horrifying to me – because it didn’t used to be that way.

    If you want something more arcane than intellectual history try medicine. or the absurd gyrations that software people go through to label different ‘ways of thinking’ about problems. Or the hell=hole of terminology: social pseudoscience, freudian pseudoscience, marxist pseudoscience, … I mean. That’s before we even talk about Theology and literary movements. omg.

    So that’s why: It’s shortcut for bundles of ideas used by people, movements, eras, or methods.

    Thanks for asking.

    I get a lot of flack for this.

    And no, I am not gonna be a Molyneux that is gonna make it easy for you.. He’s great at what he does. But that’s not what I do.

    OK?

    Cool. πŸ™‚

    Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-12 20:35:00 UTC

  • “Testimonialism as the plasma state of Truthfullness”—Bill Joslin

    —-“Testimonialism as the plasma state of Truthfullness”—Bill Joslin


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-12 20:30:00 UTC

  • I’ve been corrected:@jordanbpeterson=via Positiva, @JonHaidt=via Practica, @nnta

    I’ve been corrected:@jordanbpeterson=via Positiva, @JonHaidt=via Practica, @nntaleb=via Negativa and #curtdoolittle=grammar,logic,rhetoric.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 21:52:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/808066935770353665

  • I’ve been corrected:@jordanbpeterson=via Positiva, @JonHaidt=via Practica, @nnta

    I’ve been corrected:@jordanbpeterson=via Positiva, @JonHaidt=via Practica, @nntaleb=via Negativa and #curtdoolittle=grammar,logic,rhetoric.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 16:52:00 UTC

  • THE REASON I ENUMERATE SPECTRA (SERIES) ALL THE TIME: TO SELECT THE MODEL OF DEC

    THE REASON I ENUMERATE SPECTRA (SERIES) ALL THE TIME: TO SELECT THE MODEL OF DECIDABILITY GIVEN THE INFORMATION AT HAND. TO BE TRUTHFUL WE MUST ALWAYS USE THE MODEL THAT MAKES USE OF AVAILABLE INFORMATION.

    EPISTEMOLOGY

    Free association (possibility) > Hypothesis (survival wayfinding) > Theory (survival criticism) > Law (survival in market)

    ETHICS

    Imitation (ignorance) > Virtue (self-crafting) > Rule (cooperation) > Outcome (judges)

    ARGUMENT

    impluse > moral > historical > rational(logical) > empirical > operational > demonstrated.

    COGNITION

    imaginable > reasonable > rational > empirical > operational > testimonial.

    THE BINARY (TRUE FALSE) FALLACY

    The fallacy in any form of epistemology, including ethical epistemology, is in seeking a binary solution rather than identifying how much information you have to work with and therefore the methodology you need to ‘resort to’ given that amount of information.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-12-11 11:41:00 UTC