Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • Grammar Can Be Taught As Testimony

    GRAMMAR IS TAUGHT AS JUSTIFICATION, NOT CRITICISM But the problem of our era is the elimination of pseudoscience and deceit put forth by Marxists, Socialists, Feminists, and Postmodernists. So there is no reason we cannot teach grammar as not just ‘the good manners of victorian expression’, but as ‘the art of preventing the pollution of the commons by those who would produce deceptions in vast numbers with ease.

  • Grammar Can Be Taught As Testimony

    GRAMMAR IS TAUGHT AS JUSTIFICATION, NOT CRITICISM But the problem of our era is the elimination of pseudoscience and deceit put forth by Marxists, Socialists, Feminists, and Postmodernists. So there is no reason we cannot teach grammar as not just ‘the good manners of victorian expression’, but as ‘the art of preventing the pollution of the commons by those who would produce deceptions in vast numbers with ease.

  • Tips on Strict Construction

    TIPS ON STRICT CONSTRUCTION Strict construction, in operational language, is extremely difficult, because it requires you have procedural understanding of the subject. Strictly constructed propertarian arguments SHOULDN’T be terribly difficult because each operation is subjectively testable by you. What I’ve seen from others efforts, is an attempt to mix non-operational moral language with feigned attempts at operational language, in order to retain moral loading – in order to textually vent moral frustration.

    But if you make a propertarian argument, you’re merely showing whether theft has occurred or not, or whether theft is attempted or not. That’s all. It’s only AFTER that determination that you can use pejorative and moral language to morally load an accusation of theft or attempted theft, deceit, or error. So try to build a story consisting of statements of ‘operational accounting’ He did this, she did that, etc. And only at the end should any statement transform the analytic proof of involuntary transfer to the moral accusation. Mathematical proofs are not moral they just describe. Accounting balances are not moral, they just describe. Propertarian arguments are not moral, they just describe. Legal justification from first-principle of non-parasitism is not moral, just describes. It is after the proofs of each: mathematical equality, accounting ‘balance’, and propertarian voluntary transfer, that we render our judgments. Trying to load and frame a propertarian argument is difficult BECAUSE THAT’S PRECISELY WHAT I CREATED IT TO PREVENT.

  • Tips on Strict Construction

    TIPS ON STRICT CONSTRUCTION Strict construction, in operational language, is extremely difficult, because it requires you have procedural understanding of the subject. Strictly constructed propertarian arguments SHOULDN’T be terribly difficult because each operation is subjectively testable by you. What I’ve seen from others efforts, is an attempt to mix non-operational moral language with feigned attempts at operational language, in order to retain moral loading – in order to textually vent moral frustration.

    But if you make a propertarian argument, you’re merely showing whether theft has occurred or not, or whether theft is attempted or not. That’s all. It’s only AFTER that determination that you can use pejorative and moral language to morally load an accusation of theft or attempted theft, deceit, or error. So try to build a story consisting of statements of ‘operational accounting’ He did this, she did that, etc. And only at the end should any statement transform the analytic proof of involuntary transfer to the moral accusation. Mathematical proofs are not moral they just describe. Accounting balances are not moral, they just describe. Propertarian arguments are not moral, they just describe. Legal justification from first-principle of non-parasitism is not moral, just describes. It is after the proofs of each: mathematical equality, accounting ‘balance’, and propertarian voluntary transfer, that we render our judgments. Trying to load and frame a propertarian argument is difficult BECAUSE THAT’S PRECISELY WHAT I CREATED IT TO PREVENT.

  • TRUTHFULNESS I suppose it’s not hard to grasp these properties: 1) identity 2) c

    TRUTHFULNESS

    I suppose it’s not hard to grasp these properties:

    1) identity

    2) categorical consistency

    3) internal consistency (logical and non contradictory)

    4) external consistency (external correspondence)

    5) existential consistency (existential possibility)

    6) moral consistency (moral objectivity)

    And i suppose these tests are not terribly hard to grasp:

    1) Falsifiability

    2) Limits

    3) Parsimony

    4) Full Accounting

    But I suppose logic, mathematics, and grammar are not all that difficult either.

    But then again, the ancients didn’t solve this problem.

    It took 2500 years.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-30 11:57:00 UTC

  • Wisdom: the development of a theory (general rule) from accumulated experience,

    Wisdom: the development of a theory (general rule) from accumulated experience, rather than direct study.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-29 07:10:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736816884406980608

    Reply addressees: @ColonelFeraud @smash909 @DJTWMAR

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736683815142326272

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — 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/736683815142326272

  • I operate on the basis of survival of arguments, and I taunt opponents to fight

    I operate on the basis of survival of arguments, and I taunt opponents to fight them. Here I am. Still standing.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 13:02:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736543215277445120

    Reply addressees: @ColonelFeraud @DJTWMAR

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736481229361516544

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — 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/736481229361516544

  • One cannot make argumentative wrongs, one can only make errors and deceits. Righ

    One cannot make argumentative wrongs, one can only make errors and deceits. Right/Wrong are moral. Logic true/false.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 08:51:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736479882574696448

    Reply addressees: @ColonelFeraud @DJTWMAR

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736477206537482240

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — 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/736477206537482240

  • And it’s somewhat hard to judge one’s philosophy by a set of tweets. Although we

    And it’s somewhat hard to judge one’s philosophy by a set of tweets. Although we CAN judge one’s shaming vs reason.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 08:47:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736478875832705024

    Reply addressees: @ColonelFeraud @DJTWMAR

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736477405343326208

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — 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/736477405343326208

  • Technically speaking correction of rhetorical fallacies isn’t philosophy per se,

    Technically speaking correction of rhetorical fallacies isn’t philosophy per se, it’s a branch of logic.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-05-28 08:38:00 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736476605258862592

    Reply addressees: @ColonelFeraud @DJTWMAR

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/736475717643448320

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — 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/736475717643448320