Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Godel’s Incompleteness In Context

    Net: Construction of edge cases may be the only general rule (abstract) for the demonstration of the edge case. 

    Godel is more important in that he is one of multiple thinkers that falsified the analytic project, and the promise of making philosophy into a science.

    The subject deserves a long treatment, but the underlying issue is the limits of set logic vs operational logic. Praxiology is NOT axiomatic(deductive and justificationary) but operational(Constructive and falsificationary) – Mises and Rothbard were punching above their weight.

    Robert P. Murphy @BobMurphyEcon
    “Gödel’s Incompleteness. I report you decide”
    http://bobmurphyshow.com/7

    It’s more correct to say that (a) Babbage failed to inspire an operationalist(computational) movement. It took war and Turing. (b) the set-theoretic model of mathematics was a failure, and caused the set-theoretic model of language (philosophy) that was also a failure.

    In other words, the logical model of set theory itself is a failure. Information for deduction will emerge in any given system, meaning that the only method of falsifying it (proof) is by construction (reconstruction). Closure is only provided by demonstration in reality.

    All this means is that any deduction depends on the available hierarchy of constant relations, so that in any system of increasing complexity there will emerge niche conditions for which the solution (proof) is only by construction.

    This is the point of praxeology(operationalism) in both economics and law. The spectrum of decidability in cases (questions) varies from the easily decidable on general rules to the individual accounting of edge cases.

    The difference between computer science and humans is that we must be programmed via negativa (law), and computers via positiva (algorithms) because we have a world model, incentives within it (complete), and can always choose. They don’t and can’t. (incomplete)

    So this is better said as ‘the philosophical program like the theological program has failed, leaving only the scientific program, and operationalism. Or better, theology was loose wisdom literature, philosophy slightly better, empiricism much better, and operationalism the best.

    This is the fundamental insight of the failed programs of Mises, Brouwer, Bridgman, and to some degree Hilbert: operationalism only succeeded in physics and common law. It failed in every other field. With psychology and sociology the most obvious. Leaving room for postmodernism.

  • Godel’s Incompleteness In Context

    Net: Construction of edge cases may be the only general rule (abstract) for the demonstration of the edge case. 

    Godel is more important in that he is one of multiple thinkers that falsified the analytic project, and the promise of making philosophy into a science.

    The subject deserves a long treatment, but the underlying issue is the limits of set logic vs operational logic. Praxiology is NOT axiomatic(deductive and justificationary) but operational(Constructive and falsificationary) – Mises and Rothbard were punching above their weight.

    Robert P. Murphy @BobMurphyEcon
    “Gödel’s Incompleteness. I report you decide”
    http://bobmurphyshow.com/7

    It’s more correct to say that (a) Babbage failed to inspire an operationalist(computational) movement. It took war and Turing. (b) the set-theoretic model of mathematics was a failure, and caused the set-theoretic model of language (philosophy) that was also a failure.

    In other words, the logical model of set theory itself is a failure. Information for deduction will emerge in any given system, meaning that the only method of falsifying it (proof) is by construction (reconstruction). Closure is only provided by demonstration in reality.

    All this means is that any deduction depends on the available hierarchy of constant relations, so that in any system of increasing complexity there will emerge niche conditions for which the solution (proof) is only by construction.

    This is the point of praxeology(operationalism) in both economics and law. The spectrum of decidability in cases (questions) varies from the easily decidable on general rules to the individual accounting of edge cases.

    The difference between computer science and humans is that we must be programmed via negativa (law), and computers via positiva (algorithms) because we have a world model, incentives within it (complete), and can always choose. They don’t and can’t. (incomplete)

    So this is better said as ‘the philosophical program like the theological program has failed, leaving only the scientific program, and operationalism. Or better, theology was loose wisdom literature, philosophy slightly better, empiricism much better, and operationalism the best.

    This is the fundamental insight of the failed programs of Mises, Brouwer, Bridgman, and to some degree Hilbert: operationalism only succeeded in physics and common law. It failed in every other field. With psychology and sociology the most obvious. Leaving room for postmodernism.

  • Attention is the currency of publishers, but knowledge and understanding the con

    Attention is the currency of publishers, but knowledge and understanding the consumers who pay it. This platform is specifically designed to produce emotions – particularly agitation by moral offense or virtue signal that draws attention. So how about we all focus on what’s true.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-11-02 13:10:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1323251209587826690

    Reply addressees: @Jebedia11671131 @EricRWeinstein @SamHarrisOrg @nntaleb @ggreenwald @realDonaldTrump @Cernovich

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1323111710723612674

  • By the combination of adversarial exchange markets for seizure of opportunity, a

    By the combination of adversarial exchange markets for seizure of opportunity, and adversarial conflict markets (courts) for the resolution of disputes, human condition is maximized while human adaptation and evolution are maximized at the expense of the unfit for those markets.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-11-01 19:47:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322988603954417665

    Reply addressees: @LRRHBakery

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322988075270787078

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @LRRHBakery Causality:The purpose of law is to incrementally suppress irreciprocity and force survival in the adversarial market for the seizure of common opportunities,thereby maximizing the prosperity of the polity and minimizing the incentive to retaliate, retaliation cycles, and decline.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1322988075270787078

  • They Aren’t Fully Human

    —“How do these people not understand they—the ones calling for censorship, destruction of history, and mass murder—are the bad guys, and we—the ones who just want to be left alone to live our lives in peace—are the good guys?”—@DrewBaye

    We prevent hyperconsumption.

    Female non-conflict, larger numbers, greater equality, greater consumption, least adaptation, least maturity, least responsibility.

    Because their group strategy is herd (dysgenia) and european civilization is in the long term business of producing agency (eugenics).

    They intuit “true and good” as Sowells “Unconstrained Vision”: they are free of physical(scarcity), natural(reciprocity), and evolutionary(regression to the mean) laws. The false promise of freedom from those laws, and blaming white people (oppressors) for discovering them SELLS.

    Why? The painful truth? I’m not sure where the demarcation between domesticated animal and human lies, but it’s in part in making that distinction.

    Either rule or be ruled. Either rule intolerantly or be defeated.

  • They Aren’t Fully Human

    —“How do these people not understand they—the ones calling for censorship, destruction of history, and mass murder—are the bad guys, and we—the ones who just want to be left alone to live our lives in peace—are the good guys?”—@DrewBaye

    We prevent hyperconsumption.

    Female non-conflict, larger numbers, greater equality, greater consumption, least adaptation, least maturity, least responsibility.

    Because their group strategy is herd (dysgenia) and european civilization is in the long term business of producing agency (eugenics).

    They intuit “true and good” as Sowells “Unconstrained Vision”: they are free of physical(scarcity), natural(reciprocity), and evolutionary(regression to the mean) laws. The false promise of freedom from those laws, and blaming white people (oppressors) for discovering them SELLS.

    Why? The painful truth? I’m not sure where the demarcation between domesticated animal and human lies, but it’s in part in making that distinction.

    Either rule or be ruled. Either rule intolerantly or be defeated.

  • Ending the Woo Woo: The Cause of Dreams

    Dreams: the cortex never stops. Our brain’s more expensive in each state of excitement.When we are wakeful our experience provides input to model-building, prediction, and auto-association. Without external stimuli, hippocampal memory rehearsal (storage) creates auto association.

    Long term memory is produced by rehearsal within ~24hrs of the experience. This is why trauma drugs work if taken immediately after the event. During wakefulness we aren’t aware of the ‘distributor’ behavior of the thalamus. It stores novel episodes by auto-associative rehearsal.

    So just sensory suppression, leaving homeostatic monitoring, hippocampal episodic rehearsal, causes auto-association at lower levels of excitement, shorter information distance, lighter recursions, without ‘correction’ by external streams OR our attention.

    Advances in brain science in the past ten years alone have been as great as advances in genetics in the same period.The mystery is gone.The missing clue was that all fragments of perception are calculated by relative spatial position thus solving the big problem of consciousness.

    So that is why people like me or joscha bach are demonstrating the new model of thought that means an understanding of neural networks is as important to the soft sciences as math is to the hard sciences.

  • Ending the Woo Woo: The Cause of Dreams

    Dreams: the cortex never stops. Our brain’s more expensive in each state of excitement.When we are wakeful our experience provides input to model-building, prediction, and auto-association. Without external stimuli, hippocampal memory rehearsal (storage) creates auto association.

    Long term memory is produced by rehearsal within ~24hrs of the experience. This is why trauma drugs work if taken immediately after the event. During wakefulness we aren’t aware of the ‘distributor’ behavior of the thalamus. It stores novel episodes by auto-associative rehearsal.

    So just sensory suppression, leaving homeostatic monitoring, hippocampal episodic rehearsal, causes auto-association at lower levels of excitement, shorter information distance, lighter recursions, without ‘correction’ by external streams OR our attention.

    Advances in brain science in the past ten years alone have been as great as advances in genetics in the same period.The mystery is gone.The missing clue was that all fragments of perception are calculated by relative spatial position thus solving the big problem of consciousness.

    So that is why people like me or joscha bach are demonstrating the new model of thought that means an understanding of neural networks is as important to the soft sciences as math is to the hard sciences.

  • A Booklist for Women

    For a female psyche, what sources would you recommend to learn—-in what order?

    1) For women the primary difficulties are (a) it has to be useful to you to maintain motivation. The explanatory power is empowering because it makes psychology very simple process of ‘what are you trying to get?” (b) Women have to overcome the true/not vs approval/not problem.

    2) So you have to add a step of self-reflection and analysis. Some women love it because it really is a superpower. Some don’t because the true/no vs approval/not dichotomy is impossible for them to overcome (lack of agency).

    3) after that the dummies guide really is just something you walk thru and practice. My opinion is that it’s a lot easier than it looks but I’d need to make ‘posters’ for that to work. There are a small number of fixed concepts. But using them together is overwhelming at first.

    4) I think for most people if you get reciprocity and property in toto you can get morality down. From there you learn verbal reciprocity (language) which is the epistemology. That’s the same Idea but more complex. Then you learn the grammars which is a simple table of ‘logics’.

    5) From there you learn disambiguation by serialization and operationalization. And from there we work through making complete sentences (transactions) in operational language. At that point you get it.

    6) Hmm… I never really thought about a reading list for women before.  The Male Brain and the Female Brain, both by Louann Brizendine. I might add “the Essential Difference“(male and female brains) by baron-cohen.  Most people need to read Economics in One Lesson. To appeal to the female interests Gary becker’s books A Treatise on the Family, or The Economics of Human Behavior.  Something by Elenor Ostrom (commons).   And maybe Jane Jacobs Economy of Cities and Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful. 

    7) That’s really what’s needed. That’s it. 

     

  • A Booklist for Women

    For a female psyche, what sources would you recommend to learn—-in what order?

    1) For women the primary difficulties are (a) it has to be useful to you to maintain motivation. The explanatory power is empowering because it makes psychology very simple process of ‘what are you trying to get?” (b) Women have to overcome the true/not vs approval/not problem.

    2) So you have to add a step of self-reflection and analysis. Some women love it because it really is a superpower. Some don’t because the true/no vs approval/not dichotomy is impossible for them to overcome (lack of agency).

    3) after that the dummies guide really is just something you walk thru and practice. My opinion is that it’s a lot easier than it looks but I’d need to make ‘posters’ for that to work. There are a small number of fixed concepts. But using them together is overwhelming at first.

    4) I think for most people if you get reciprocity and property in toto you can get morality down. From there you learn verbal reciprocity (language) which is the epistemology. That’s the same Idea but more complex. Then you learn the grammars which is a simple table of ‘logics’.

    5) From there you learn disambiguation by serialization and operationalization. And from there we work through making complete sentences (transactions) in operational language. At that point you get it.

    6) Hmm… I never really thought about a reading list for women before.  The Male Brain and the Female Brain, both by Louann Brizendine. I might add “the Essential Difference“(male and female brains) by baron-cohen.  Most people need to read Economics in One Lesson. To appeal to the female interests Gary becker’s books A Treatise on the Family, or The Economics of Human Behavior.  Something by Elenor Ostrom (commons).   And maybe Jane Jacobs Economy of Cities and Schumacher’s Small is Beautiful. 

    7) That’s really what’s needed. That’s it.