(FB 1547468306 Timestamp) RUSSIANS HAVE A WORD FOR REALITY Bytie (бÑÑие), Russian. This word comes from the Russian byt'(to exist). In Russian-English dictionaries this philosophical concept is translated as “being.” However, bytie (бÑÑие) is not just life or existence, itâs the existence of an objective reality that is independent of human consciousness (cosmos, nature, matter).
Form: Definition
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547349746 Timestamp) —“What’s your view on semiotics, Curt?”— it is in the category of marks, pictograms, character symbols, iconography, artistic composition, suggestion, advertising, propaganda: suggestion by free association, and used like numerology and astrology: untestable, and incalculable.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547349746 Timestamp) —“What’s your view on semiotics, Curt?”— it is in the category of marks, pictograms, character symbols, iconography, artistic composition, suggestion, advertising, propaganda: suggestion by free association, and used like numerology and astrology: untestable, and incalculable.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547302842 Timestamp) by Bill Joslin Compatiblism – degrees of bounded freedom. It’s about accounting for the causal chain and if the actor contributes to the causal chain (opposed to a causal chain being proof of no will). We can contribute to our causal chain because we can imagine alternate states of affairs. In that imagining we affect the causal chain. So the effect of that imagining will be varied. You can imagine via nonsense or reason – post-structuralism or post-positivism, mysticism or naturalism. You can chose, but you can’t avoid the consequences of that choice, no matter how much you imagine the state of affairs to be different than it actually is.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547270284 Timestamp) TERMINOLOGY: NO SHORTCUT TO UNDERSTANDING worth repeating One does not criticize either terminology or deviation from normative definitions, but instead, the precision of the definitions, such that we are free of opportunity for conflation, and subsequent error. Each field uses terminology particular to it, and propertarianism (law) uses universals (operational names in series) across all fields. In either case we define terms that eliminate the error and potential for error in colloquial speech (“ordinary language”). In other words no field is, can be, reduced to ordinary language without the introduction of the vast ignorance and error that separates ordinary language from scientific language. That is because the existence of, and market demands for science and scientific prose evolved precisely to compensate for the ignorance, error, bias, fictionalism, and deceit in ordinary language. And moreover, since propertarianism serves as the scientific language of social science – including history, economics, law, sociology, morality, ethics, psychology, and language itself – we are forcing into the political discourse the same adaptation as did the revolution in physical science: and with equally disruptive consequences to normative language, ideas, ideology, religion, and language of those disciplines. So the criticism that we should use the colloquial speech in our effort to change social sciences from sophisms and pseudoscience dependent upon intuition and projection, and monopoly and conformity, into a form of calculation as is used in the other sciences, and divisions of cognition and labor, and conditions of cooperation, competition, and war, is rather … ridiculous really. All systems of symbolic calculation whether they be the small difference between spoken language and written language, or great differences between spoken language, written language, arithmetic, accounting, geometry, the calculus, relativity, chemistry, biology, ecology, economics, require training. The great difference is that we are all more invested in our daily use of the psychological, social, and political, such that we defend those investments no matter how bad they are. Unfortunately the average idiot who will readily say he understands neither advanced mathematics, economics, or subatomic physics will not similarly question his understanding of ethics, morality, and politics – thereby demonstrating his lack of agency due to malinvestment and ignorance, and genetic, gender, class, cultural bias. Ergo, there is no shortcut to knowledge. Calculation is counter intuitive – particularly in intuitionistic subjects.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547483001 Timestamp) NORMIE VERSION OF “WHAT IS PROPERTARIANISM?” (via Bill and Curt) Propertarianism is a method – it’s the completion of the scientific method, and that scientific method applied to EVERYTHING – including language, psychology, social science, economics, politics and group competitive strategies. So while propertarianism consists of the completion of the scientific method, what results from that scientific method, is scientific law, and scientific government, which makes it possible for us to cooperate in the post industrial era. And the benefit of scientific law and scientific government is that it ends parasitism and deceit in politics economics and law, and provides scientific solutions to the conflicts of politics economics and law. In the broader historical sense, propertarianism completes the greco-anglo empirical program to complete the sciences, and to eliminate bias, wishful thinking, deception, superstition, idealism, and pseudoscience from the the public discourse that we call ‘the informational commons”.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547483001 Timestamp) NORMIE VERSION OF “WHAT IS PROPERTARIANISM?” (via Bill and Curt) Propertarianism is a method – it’s the completion of the scientific method, and that scientific method applied to EVERYTHING – including language, psychology, social science, economics, politics and group competitive strategies. So while propertarianism consists of the completion of the scientific method, what results from that scientific method, is scientific law, and scientific government, which makes it possible for us to cooperate in the post industrial era. And the benefit of scientific law and scientific government is that it ends parasitism and deceit in politics economics and law, and provides scientific solutions to the conflicts of politics economics and law. In the broader historical sense, propertarianism completes the greco-anglo empirical program to complete the sciences, and to eliminate bias, wishful thinking, deception, superstition, idealism, and pseudoscience from the the public discourse that we call ‘the informational commons”.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547591292 Timestamp) —“Curt when you say ‘productive’ what do you mean?”— Eric Orwoll. Anything that is not unproductive. For example, blackmail does not increase any form of capital – it is voluntary but parasitic. In economics if the returns on an opportunity cost of a transaction is greater than the returns on the next most preferable opportunity cost (holding the good, service, or information), then it is unproductive. This is a bit difficult for most people to deal with because it consists almost entirely of via-negativa logic. So we just measure changes to property in toto and ask if it is negative or positive. If it is positive it doesn’t matter if it’s voluntary. If it’s negative it’s very hard to imagine that it was voluntary. And it’s just as hard to demonstrate the counter to that statement as it is to counter the premise of rational action. When all else false demonstrated behavior is what it is: evidence of involuntary transfer.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547591292 Timestamp) —“Curt when you say ‘productive’ what do you mean?”— Eric Orwoll. Anything that is not unproductive. For example, blackmail does not increase any form of capital – it is voluntary but parasitic. In economics if the returns on an opportunity cost of a transaction is greater than the returns on the next most preferable opportunity cost (holding the good, service, or information), then it is unproductive. This is a bit difficult for most people to deal with because it consists almost entirely of via-negativa logic. So we just measure changes to property in toto and ask if it is negative or positive. If it is positive it doesn’t matter if it’s voluntary. If it’s negative it’s very hard to imagine that it was voluntary. And it’s just as hard to demonstrate the counter to that statement as it is to counter the premise of rational action. When all else false demonstrated behavior is what it is: evidence of involuntary transfer.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1547695098 Timestamp) REFACTORING: The process of restructuring existing computer code to improve the nonfunctional attributes of the software (its ‘factors’), without changing its external behavior. (Usually caused by centralizing common functionality (subtracting), standardizing readability or performance (transforming), or increasing defensibility against error (adding) Antonym: REFUCKTORING: The process of taking a well-designed piece of code and, through a series of small, reversible changes, making it completely unmaintainable by anyone except yourself. (Usually caused by confusing code parsimony with compiled or bytecode(p-code) parsimony, removing all semantic (human readable) utility.) (via James Santagata)