(In my mind, the model, the motions, the colors, the textures… are all separate things.)
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-18 03:24:00 UTC
(In my mind, the model, the motions, the colors, the textures… are all separate things.)
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-18 03:24:00 UTC
Aug 25, 2016 8:02am There is as great a difference in informational content and therefore truth (decidability), between Operationalism and Empiricism, as there was between empiricism and reason, and between reason, and storytelling. This is why, in the future, people will rely on Propertarianism and Testimonialism over ‘mere’ empiricism, the same way we empiricists rely on empiricism over rationalism. And this in turn, is why Propertarianism and Testimonialism and Operationalism will produce as great a leap forward in the ‘average’ human mind, as scientific thinking using general rules has produced an advance over rational thinking using particularist recipes.
Aug 25, 2016 8:02am There is as great a difference in informational content and therefore truth (decidability), between Operationalism and Empiricism, as there was between empiricism and reason, and between reason, and storytelling. This is why, in the future, people will rely on Propertarianism and Testimonialism over ‘mere’ empiricism, the same way we empiricists rely on empiricism over rationalism. And this in turn, is why Propertarianism and Testimonialism and Operationalism will produce as great a leap forward in the ‘average’ human mind, as scientific thinking using general rules has produced an advance over rational thinking using particularist recipes.
Some people ask if they approve Some people ask if it’s good. Some people ask if it’s true. Some people ask if it’s fraud. A prosecutor tests first for fraud. A scientist tests first for truth. A philosopher tests first for good. A common man tests first for his approval. Everyone tests whether he understands. First, seek to understand. Second if it’s true. Third if it’s a fraud. Fourth if it’s good Last, if you approve. No one else cares if you approve of much. You shouldn’t either.
Some people ask if they approve Some people ask if it’s good. Some people ask if it’s true. Some people ask if it’s fraud. A prosecutor tests first for fraud. A scientist tests first for truth. A philosopher tests first for good. A common man tests first for his approval. Everyone tests whether he understands. First, seek to understand. Second if it’s true. Third if it’s a fraud. Fourth if it’s good Last, if you approve. No one else cares if you approve of much. You shouldn’t either.
The philosophy of Money is kind of stupid really. Money stores time. It’s time that’s the first object of construction in cooperation. Everything else in cooperation evolves from the problem of time. Any philosophical understanding of Money is subject to the philosophy of TIME
The philosophy of Money is kind of stupid really. Money stores time. It’s time that’s the first object of construction in cooperation. Everything else in cooperation evolves from the problem of time. Any philosophical understanding of Money is subject to the philosophy of TIME
THE REASON THEY ALL DESIRE WHITE GENOCIDE IS THAT WE ARE THE ARISTOCRACY AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. Without us they can return to Levantine degeneracy. Man prefers to be an animal, and we force his transcendence into gods against his will.
THE REASON THEY ALL DESIRE WHITE GENOCIDE IS THAT WE ARE THE ARISTOCRACY AND ALWAYS HAVE BEEN. Without us they can return to Levantine degeneracy. Man prefers to be an animal, and we force his transcendence into gods against his will.
Just as we evolve property from common to private,
Just as we evolve the suppression of parasitism from criminal, to fraudulent, to free riding, to conspiratorial, to warfare;
Just as we evolve from mysticism to reason, to rationalism, to empiricism, to testimonialism;
we also evolve truth from justificationary, to moral, to honesty, to scientific, to testimonial.
Each thing we do removes frictions.
Source date (UTC): 2016-09-17 09:17:00 UTC