Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • **What Does Truth Mean? (And What Is Its Adjective Form?)**

    Truth can only mean ‘descriptive testimony free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit’. In other words, speech, the semantic content of which corresponds with reality. One speaks **truthfully**, or **untruthfully **(warrantied)**, **or** honestly **or** dishonestly **(not warrantied)**. ** To be precise, one speaks honestly or dishonestly having done no due diligence, and warrantying one’s speech. To speak truthfully requires that you have done due diligence. So you might speak honestly not having done due diligence of your speech, but not truthfully, having done due diligence of your speech. So you might give your honest opinion, but that differs from doing diligence that such an opinion survives criticism – meaning correspondence. How do we test correspondence? In the most simple of terms, a truth statement must be: 1. **categorically** consistent (non conflationary) 2. **internally** consistent (logical), 3. **externally** correspondent (empirical), 4. **operationally** possible (existentially possible), 5. **coherent** categorically, internally, externally, and operationally (consistent across all tests) 6. **fully accounted **(you haven’t cherry picked cause and/or consequence) And if you want to claim it’s ethical and moral: 1. **rational**: consisting of nothing but a series of fully rational choices 2. **reciprocal:** consisting of nothing other than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of imposition upon others by externality. We use the word in many, many contexts. Most of them somewhere between a convenience and a dishonesty. True, honest, logical, and good are independent concepts frequently conflated to attribute authority where it is absent.

  • **WHAT DOES TRUTH MEAN? (AND WHAT IS ITS ADJECTIVE FORM?)** Truth can only mean

    **WHAT DOES TRUTH MEAN? (AND WHAT IS ITS ADJECTIVE FORM?)**

    Truth can only mean ‘descriptive testimony free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit’. In other words, speech, the semantic content of which corresponds with reality.

    One speaks **truthfully**, or **untruthfully **(warrantied)**, **or** honestly **or** dishonestly **(not warrantied)**. **

    To be precise, one speaks honestly or dishonestly having done no due diligence, and warrantying one’s speech.

    To speak truthfully requires that you have done due diligence. So you might speak honestly not having done due diligence of your speech, but not truthfully, having done due diligence of your speech. So you might give your honest opinion, but that differs from doing diligence that such an opinion survives criticism – meaning correspondence.

    How do we test correspondence? In the most simple of terms, a truth statement must be:

    1. **categorically** consistent (non conflationary)

    2. **internally** consistent (logical),

    3. **externally** correspondent (empirical),

    4. **operationally** possible (existentially possible),

    5. **coherent** categorically, internally, externally, and operationally (consistent across all tests)

    6. **fully accounted **(you haven’t cherry picked cause and/or consequence)

    And if you want to claim it’s ethical and moral:

    1. **rational**: consisting of nothing but a series of fully rational choices

    2. **reciprocal:** consisting of nothing other than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of imposition upon others by externality.

    We use the word in many, many contexts. Most of them somewhere between a convenience and a dishonesty. True, honest, logical, and good are independent concepts frequently conflated to attribute authority where it is absent.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-14 22:12:00 UTC

  • **What Does Truth Mean? (And What Is Its Adjective Form?)**

    Truth can only mean ‘descriptive testimony free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit’. In other words, speech, the semantic content of which corresponds with reality. One speaks **truthfully**, or **untruthfully **(warrantied)**, **or** honestly **or** dishonestly **(not warrantied)**. ** To be precise, one speaks honestly or dishonestly having done no due diligence, and warrantying one’s speech. To speak truthfully requires that you have done due diligence. So you might speak honestly not having done due diligence of your speech, but not truthfully, having done due diligence of your speech. So you might give your honest opinion, but that differs from doing diligence that such an opinion survives criticism – meaning correspondence. How do we test correspondence? In the most simple of terms, a truth statement must be: 1. **categorically** consistent (non conflationary) 2. **internally** consistent (logical), 3. **externally** correspondent (empirical), 4. **operationally** possible (existentially possible), 5. **coherent** categorically, internally, externally, and operationally (consistent across all tests) 6. **fully accounted **(you haven’t cherry picked cause and/or consequence) And if you want to claim it’s ethical and moral: 1. **rational**: consisting of nothing but a series of fully rational choices 2. **reciprocal:** consisting of nothing other than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of imposition upon others by externality. We use the word in many, many contexts. Most of them somewhere between a convenience and a dishonesty. True, honest, logical, and good are independent concepts frequently conflated to attribute authority where it is absent.

  • Technically, mathematics is a logic, not a science. Axioms can be declared = log

    Technically, mathematics is a logic, not a science. Axioms can be declared = logic. Laws must be discovered and cannot be declared = science. One can model science with axioms, but it remains logic, not science. ie? STEM = “Science, Technology, Engineering, and Mathematics”. -cheers

  • “What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley In economics,

    –“What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley

    In economics, the term ‘multiplier’ means that more is gained than lost by the operation(transaction), ergo, in physics, a more complex organization is created and stable state retained. (or stated in economic terms, a more complex capital is formed.)

    (BTW: good question.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-14 11:29:00 UTC

  • “What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley In economics,

    –“What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley In economics, the term ‘multiplier’ means that more is gained than lost by the operation(transaction), ergo, in physics, a more complex organization is created and stable state retained. (or stated in economic terms, a more complex capital is formed.) (BTW: good question.)

  • “What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley In economics,

    –“What are you meaning by subatomic multipliers?”— Davin Eastley In economics, the term ‘multiplier’ means that more is gained than lost by the operation(transaction), ergo, in physics, a more complex organization is created and stable state retained. (or stated in economic terms, a more complex capital is formed.) (BTW: good question.)

  • What Is The Adjective Form Of Truth?

    WHAT DOES TRUTH MEAN? (AND WHAT IS ITS ADJECTIVE FORM?)

    Truth can only mean ‘descriptive testimony free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit’. In other words, speech, the semantic content of which corresponds with reality.

    One speaks truthfully, or untruthfully , or honestly or dishonestly.

    To be precise, one speaks honestly not having done due diligence, nor warrantying one’s speech. One speaks truthfully having done due diligence, and warrantying one’s speech.

    So you might speak honestly – not having done due diligence on your speech. But that is not the same as speaking truthfully – having done due diligence on your speech. So you might give your honest opinion, but that differs from doing diligence that such an opinion survives criticism – meaning correspondence.

    Both the physical sciences and law specialize in the art of due diligence. As an extension of law, anglo analytic philosophy attempts to specialize in the art of due diligence. Strangely, continental philosophy does the opposite.

    But if speaking truthfully requires that we perform due diligence, and warranty our speech, then how does one perform such due diligence? How do we test correspondence? In the most simple of terms, a truth statement must be:

    1. categorically consistent (non conflationary)
    2. internally consistent (logical),
    3. externally correspondent (empirical),
    4. operationally possible (existentially possible),
    5. coherent categorically, internally, externally, and operationally (consistent across all tests)
    6. fully accounted (you haven’t cherry picked cause and/or consequence)

    And if you want to claim it’s ethical and moral (and objectively legal):

    1. rational: consisting of nothing but a series of fully rational choices
    2. reciprocal: consisting of nothing other than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of imposition upon others by externality.

    We use the word ‘Truth’ in many, many contexts. Most of them somewhere between a convenience and a dishonesty. True, honest, logical, and good are independent concepts frequently conflated to attribute authority where it is absent.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-adjective-form-of-truth

  • What Is The Adjective Form Of Truth?

    WHAT DOES TRUTH MEAN? (AND WHAT IS ITS ADJECTIVE FORM?)

    Truth can only mean ‘descriptive testimony free of error, bias, suggestion, obscurantism and deceit’. In other words, speech, the semantic content of which corresponds with reality.

    One speaks truthfully, or untruthfully , or honestly or dishonestly.

    To be precise, one speaks honestly not having done due diligence, nor warrantying one’s speech. One speaks truthfully having done due diligence, and warrantying one’s speech.

    So you might speak honestly – not having done due diligence on your speech. But that is not the same as speaking truthfully – having done due diligence on your speech. So you might give your honest opinion, but that differs from doing diligence that such an opinion survives criticism – meaning correspondence.

    Both the physical sciences and law specialize in the art of due diligence. As an extension of law, anglo analytic philosophy attempts to specialize in the art of due diligence. Strangely, continental philosophy does the opposite.

    But if speaking truthfully requires that we perform due diligence, and warranty our speech, then how does one perform such due diligence? How do we test correspondence? In the most simple of terms, a truth statement must be:

    1. categorically consistent (non conflationary)
    2. internally consistent (logical),
    3. externally correspondent (empirical),
    4. operationally possible (existentially possible),
    5. coherent categorically, internally, externally, and operationally (consistent across all tests)
    6. fully accounted (you haven’t cherry picked cause and/or consequence)

    And if you want to claim it’s ethical and moral (and objectively legal):

    1. rational: consisting of nothing but a series of fully rational choices
    2. reciprocal: consisting of nothing other than productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges free of imposition upon others by externality.

    We use the word ‘Truth’ in many, many contexts. Most of them somewhere between a convenience and a dishonesty. True, honest, logical, and good are independent concepts frequently conflated to attribute authority where it is absent.

    https://www.quora.com/What-is-the-adjective-form-of-truth

  • Bad is an empirical measure. All notions of good-bad, moral-immoral, ethical-une

    Bad is an empirical measure. All notions of good-bad, moral-immoral, ethical-unethical, criminality and innocence are simply measures of voluntary or involuntary imposition of wanted or unwanted costs. All emotions are nothing but rewards and punishments for costs and returns.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-12 14:23:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951822015161425920

    Reply addressees: @RyanRoach5 @CurtisHouck @RichLowry @joanwalsh

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/951808936088297472

    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/951808936088297472