Form: Argument

  • Very frustrating for philosophers playing cunning word games to realize that (a)

    Very frustrating for philosophers playing cunning word games to realize that (a) almost all supposedly complex questions are merely errors in grammar, and (b) there is no closure available to the logics, (c) the logics are purely falsificationary – just like the sciences.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-10 21:47:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1171540783494656000

    Reply addressees: @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1171540362231332864


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT Better, try “The liar’s paradox isn’t, it’s just a sophism of grammar using the copula in an incomplete sentence.” In fact, ask them to state any difficult philosophical question without using the verb to be, in a complete sentence, in operational language. Oops. Sophisms all.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1171540362231332864


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT Better, try “The liar’s paradox isn’t, it’s just a sophism of grammar using the copula in an incomplete sentence.” In fact, ask them to state any difficult philosophical question without using the verb to be, in a complete sentence, in operational language. Oops. Sophisms all.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1171540362231332864

  • Better, try “The liar’s paradox isn’t, it’s just a sophism of grammar using the

    Better, try “The liar’s paradox isn’t, it’s just a sophism of grammar using the copula in an incomplete sentence.” In fact, ask them to state any difficult philosophical question without using the verb to be, in a complete sentence, in operational language. Oops. Sophisms all.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-10 21:46:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1171540362231332864

    Reply addressees: @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1171539094779772928


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT It’s exasperating. Continentals are secular theologians at best. But even analytic philosophers are mostly sophists. Try to explain that the logics are falsificationary not justificationary. Ask them to try to prove something non trivial. Heads explode.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1171539094779772928


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @StefanMolyneux @THEWRENCHLEFT It’s exasperating. Continentals are secular theologians at best. But even analytic philosophers are mostly sophists. Try to explain that the logics are falsificationary not justificationary. Ask them to try to prove something non trivial. Heads explode.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1171539094779772928

  • Politicians, academics, public intellectuals, reporters – the entire gossip prof

    Politicians, academics, public intellectuals, reporters – the entire gossip profession, would have to warranty the truthfulness (scientific), operationality, and reciprocity of their speech, and could not advocate for irreciprocity using falsehoods. Only Trades.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-01 17:34:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168215450901209088

    Reply addressees: @last_scout2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168214996859478016


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @last_scout2 When engaged in Public Speech TO the Public (not talking with friends etc), esp for commercial gain, you can’t make false or irreciprocal statements in matters of the commons (economics, politics, law, science). This will criminalize political correctness and the pseudosciences.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1168214996859478016


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @last_scout2 When engaged in Public Speech TO the Public (not talking with friends etc), esp for commercial gain, you can’t make false or irreciprocal statements in matters of the commons (economics, politics, law, science). This will criminalize political correctness and the pseudosciences.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1168214996859478016

  • When engaged in Public Speech TO the Public (not talking with friends etc), esp

    When engaged in Public Speech TO the Public (not talking with friends etc), esp for commercial gain, you can’t make false or irreciprocal statements in matters of the commons (economics, politics, law, science). This will criminalize political correctness and the pseudosciences.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-01 17:32:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168214996859478016

    Reply addressees: @last_scout2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168213963450015756


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @last_scout2 Think of it this way. What can you testify to in court? What do you have the knowledge to testify to? We hold people accountable for their testimony, for their commercial speech, but not their political, academic, and scientific speech (matters of the commons). So …

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1168213963450015756


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @last_scout2 Think of it this way. What can you testify to in court? What do you have the knowledge to testify to? We hold people accountable for their testimony, for their commercial speech, but not their political, academic, and scientific speech (matters of the commons). So …

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1168213963450015756

  • Think of it this way. What can you testify to in court? What do you have the kno

    Think of it this way. What can you testify to in court? What do you have the knowledge to testify to? We hold people accountable for their testimony, for their commercial speech, but not their political, academic, and scientific speech (matters of the commons). So …


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-01 17:28:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168213963450015756

    Reply addressees: @last_scout2

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1168146097296019457


    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/1168146097296019457

  • WHY? Because Meaningful can only refer to physically, emotionally, cognitively a

    WHY?
    Because Meaningful can only refer to physically, emotionally, cognitively actionable.

    It’s just like rational. All Actions are Rational. All that is Meaningful is Actionable. We… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=456169494979946&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-28 18:04:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1166773622486310912

  • No, Mutation Rate Is Not An Argument Against Natural Selection (Core)

    (Core)Sorry All But, No. Mutation Rate != Evolutionary Rate

    (a) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. For example, 20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory. That number varies by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed), suppressing (turning off), or regulatory, and some percentage of the rest are expressive, and some cause profound variations between ourselves and the other apes. We just don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference between ancestors – it does not tell us difference in genetic expression over that ancestry.

    (b) Some changes are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races)

    (c) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound.

    (d) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So;

    (e) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations.

    (f) We make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes.

    (g) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by:

    – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics:

    While history has led us to the error that mathematics is justificationary – it is not. It is falsificationary, like all the logics. This is, in itself, the most significant insight of the 20th century experiment in both philosophy and the sciences – there are no via positiva methods of inquiry other than free association. All other logics, correspondences, operations are falsificationary: falsifying errors, confirming statements of possibility, not not providing truth (perfect parsimony).

    There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period.

    You can’t average an average, and statistics must be operationally explicable or they’re meaningless. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations)

    The reason you are (most are) misled by statistics is that they are not accompanied by operational constructions (proofs: demonstrations of operational possibility – which is what ‘proof’ means).

    Metaphysics, Psychology, the Social Sciences, and economics in particular are vehicles for that branch of pseudoscience dependent upon innumeracy.Innumeracy is a member of the set of sophisms including:

    1. sophism(verbal),
    2. innumeracy(numerical),
    3. pseudoscience(scientific and technological),
    4. magic-supernormalism(natural),
    5. mysticism-supernaturalism(supernatural).

    The Four Falsifications Against ID Are:

    1. God’s silence, 2. God’s inaction, 3. The lack of evidence, and 4. The universe looks exactly like a godless universe would, and not at all like a Christian universe would, even down to its very structure.

    Of course this is true if you think gods are material beings. If instead you think gods are software distributed in the minds of all of their worshippers, producing synchronicities because of the software, then that’s quite different. The Falsifiation Against God is:

    5. Information can only be stored in some memory or other. And  information stored must be abstracted (generalized) in order to consume fewer calories and less volume than the original matter plus its changes in state over time. That information cannot be stored except in the universe itself or across universes themselves. Yet if Christianity is but a set of parables (wisdom literature) then Scientifically (Logically, Rationally, Empirically, and Operationally ):

    6 – The five rules of Christianity are, logically, rationally(incentives), scientifically(empirically), the optimum prisoner’s dilemma (incentives for trust building) strategy, and I cannot falsify either or their relation. There is a reason christian working and lower classes are wealthier than competing cults. Christianity is the reason.

    The Five Rules Are:

    1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. (Forgiveness) 2) the extension of familial love to kith and kin. (Investment) 3) the eradication of impulses that burden the commons (Sacredness) 4) the demand for personal acts of charity and personal cost, (Charity) 5) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. (Tolerance)

    We bear the costs of discipline, investment, forgiveness, tolerance because it is the optimum strategy for producing cooperation at scale.

    In Western (European) Civilization, these Christian (Literary) traditions, exist in competition with our Indo European legal (empirical) traditions:

    1. Truth before Face: Truth regardless of cost to the competence/dominance hierarchy (“Reporting”, or “Testimony”) 2. Heroism, Excellence and Duty (investment in the commons) 3. Individual Sovereignty, Reciprocity and Accountability

    Together which make possible:

    4. Universal Adjudication of Differences by tests of demonstrated interests (investments) – what we call ‘Natural Law’. 5. Common Law of Tort, Judge Referee, Jury Decision, and Nullification

    And leave possible only one means of social organization:

    6. Voluntary Cooperation and Markets in All Aspects of Life:

    1. Association 2. Cooperation (production) 3. Production (goods, services, information) 4. Reproduction (mating, marriage, family) 5. Commons 6. Polities 7. War

    The consequence of which is the fastest possible means of adaptation, innovation, and evolution, that is possible for man – at the cost of suppression of reproduction of the underclasses that cannot compete in the markets for cooperation – the only empirical  (demonstrated) measure of the value of individuals, families, and groups, to others.

    Which is the Secret of Western Civilization: Via Positiva Hard Markets and Via Negativa Soft Eugenics. And Finally;

    7 – I cannot falsify evolution and every single dram of evidence from the fundamental structure of the universe to the imagination of man is a product of a very small number of possibilities in very great permutation, just as limited numbers of sounds, characters, and numbers can be arranged in infinitely complex permutations. Truthful speech can only consist of what I can testify to – “Report on”: I can only testify to that which is:

    1. categorically consistent 2. logically consistent 3. empirically(observably) consistent 4. operationally consistent 5. rationally consistent 6. reciprocally consistent where;

    7. the causality is parsimonious 8. scope is consistent 9. and fully accounted 10. within stated limits and where;

    11. due diligence has been demonstrated, in the above ten dimensions. and where;

    – one’s statements are warrantied by restitution if one errs. therefore;

    I cannot testify to anything other than. 1. Realism, 2. Naturalism, 3. Operationalism, 4. Rational Choice, 5. Reciprocity (Voluntary Exchange), 6. My Due Diligence Performed, 7. My capacity to perform restitution if I have engaged in ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking or deceit.Nor can anyone else. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute

  • No, Mutation Rate Is Not An Argument Against Natural Selection (Core)

    (Core)Sorry All But, No. Mutation Rate != Evolutionary Rate

    (a) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. For example, 20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory. That number varies by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed), suppressing (turning off), or regulatory, and some percentage of the rest are expressive, and some cause profound variations between ourselves and the other apes. We just don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference between ancestors – it does not tell us difference in genetic expression over that ancestry.

    (b) Some changes are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races)

    (c) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound.

    (d) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So;

    (e) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations.

    (f) We make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes.

    (g) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by:

    – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics:

    While history has led us to the error that mathematics is justificationary – it is not. It is falsificationary, like all the logics. This is, in itself, the most significant insight of the 20th century experiment in both philosophy and the sciences – there are no via positiva methods of inquiry other than free association. All other logics, correspondences, operations are falsificationary: falsifying errors, confirming statements of possibility, not not providing truth (perfect parsimony).

    There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period.

    You can’t average an average, and statistics must be operationally explicable or they’re meaningless. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations)

    The reason you are (most are) misled by statistics is that they are not accompanied by operational constructions (proofs: demonstrations of operational possibility – which is what ‘proof’ means).

    Metaphysics, Psychology, the Social Sciences, and economics in particular are vehicles for that branch of pseudoscience dependent upon innumeracy.Innumeracy is a member of the set of sophisms including:

    1. sophism(verbal),
    2. innumeracy(numerical),
    3. pseudoscience(scientific and technological),
    4. magic-supernormalism(natural),
    5. mysticism-supernaturalism(supernatural).

    The Four Falsifications Against ID Are:

    1. God’s silence, 2. God’s inaction, 3. The lack of evidence, and 4. The universe looks exactly like a godless universe would, and not at all like a Christian universe would, even down to its very structure.

    Of course this is true if you think gods are material beings. If instead you think gods are software distributed in the minds of all of their worshippers, producing synchronicities because of the software, then that’s quite different. The Falsifiation Against God is:

    5. Information can only be stored in some memory or other. And  information stored must be abstracted (generalized) in order to consume fewer calories and less volume than the original matter plus its changes in state over time. That information cannot be stored except in the universe itself or across universes themselves. Yet if Christianity is but a set of parables (wisdom literature) then Scientifically (Logically, Rationally, Empirically, and Operationally ):

    6 – The five rules of Christianity are, logically, rationally(incentives), scientifically(empirically), the optimum prisoner’s dilemma (incentives for trust building) strategy, and I cannot falsify either or their relation. There is a reason christian working and lower classes are wealthier than competing cults. Christianity is the reason.

    The Five Rules Are:

    1) the eradication of hatred from the human heart. (Forgiveness) 2) the extension of familial love to kith and kin. (Investment) 3) the eradication of impulses that burden the commons (Sacredness) 4) the demand for personal acts of charity and personal cost, (Charity) 5) the extension of exhaustive forgiveness before punishment, enserfment, enslavement, death, or war. (Tolerance)

    We bear the costs of discipline, investment, forgiveness, tolerance because it is the optimum strategy for producing cooperation at scale.

    In Western (European) Civilization, these Christian (Literary) traditions, exist in competition with our Indo European legal (empirical) traditions:

    1. Truth before Face: Truth regardless of cost to the competence/dominance hierarchy (“Reporting”, or “Testimony”) 2. Heroism, Excellence and Duty (investment in the commons) 3. Individual Sovereignty, Reciprocity and Accountability

    Together which make possible:

    4. Universal Adjudication of Differences by tests of demonstrated interests (investments) – what we call ‘Natural Law’. 5. Common Law of Tort, Judge Referee, Jury Decision, and Nullification

    And leave possible only one means of social organization:

    6. Voluntary Cooperation and Markets in All Aspects of Life:

    1. Association 2. Cooperation (production) 3. Production (goods, services, information) 4. Reproduction (mating, marriage, family) 5. Commons 6. Polities 7. War

    The consequence of which is the fastest possible means of adaptation, innovation, and evolution, that is possible for man – at the cost of suppression of reproduction of the underclasses that cannot compete in the markets for cooperation – the only empirical  (demonstrated) measure of the value of individuals, families, and groups, to others.

    Which is the Secret of Western Civilization: Via Positiva Hard Markets and Via Negativa Soft Eugenics. And Finally;

    7 – I cannot falsify evolution and every single dram of evidence from the fundamental structure of the universe to the imagination of man is a product of a very small number of possibilities in very great permutation, just as limited numbers of sounds, characters, and numbers can be arranged in infinitely complex permutations. Truthful speech can only consist of what I can testify to – “Report on”: I can only testify to that which is:

    1. categorically consistent 2. logically consistent 3. empirically(observably) consistent 4. operationally consistent 5. rationally consistent 6. reciprocally consistent where;

    7. the causality is parsimonious 8. scope is consistent 9. and fully accounted 10. within stated limits and where;

    11. due diligence has been demonstrated, in the above ten dimensions. and where;

    – one’s statements are warrantied by restitution if one errs. therefore;

    I cannot testify to anything other than. 1. Realism, 2. Naturalism, 3. Operationalism, 4. Rational Choice, 5. Reciprocity (Voluntary Exchange), 6. My Due Diligence Performed, 7. My capacity to perform restitution if I have engaged in ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking or deceit.Nor can anyone else. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute

  • SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME. (a) mutatio

    SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME.

    (a) mutation rate != yardage (or any other linear measure)

    (b) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=454549698475259&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-25 16:33:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165663615866851328

  • The Four Reasons Are 1. God’s silence, 2. God’s inaction, 3. the lack of evidenc

    The Four Reasons Are
    1. God’s silence,
    2. God’s inaction,
    3. the lack of evidence, and
    4. the universe looks exactly like a godless universe would,
    and not at all like a Christian… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=454158935181002&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-08-24 22:54:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1165396988587859968