Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • ~~”I am not here to discredit the faith.” … “The bible is a work of ideology”

    ~~”I am not here to discredit the faith.” … “The bible is a work of ideology” … “Reading the bible with a critical eye teaches respect for the ingenuity of the authors of the work in teaching so many people despite their culture, ability, age, literacy, and education.” … ~~”Give the authors their due.”– Prof Israel Finkelstein

    He’s correct of course. As such we can obtain the spiritual meaning from the text as we do from any other mythology or mythological history, without requiring that the historical claims are factual as much as ideological explanations and justifications that help us derive the proper spiritual meaning and resulting moral behavior, that the authors intended.

    While Chinese philosophy like European philosophy, like the formalization of post-bronze-age-collapse semitic religions, all developed around the same time. With the abrahamic the ‘last’ in that series, because it was largely a counter-revolution against the Indo-European, and especially Greek and roman superiority in technology, military, politics, and philosophy.

    The Chinese were less technical than the europeans for reasons we are not quite sure, but were partly to do with the lack of western law of peerage and lack of European low context high precision language, appear to have produced the resulting impossibility of forming a rule of law government, and finally, some rather odd challenges that emerge with the Chinese language which is high context and low precision.

    The Europeans invented rational philosophy. But the europeans evolved formal civilization thousands of years after the middle east had developed civilization. The earlier fertile crescent civilization relied on an older technology that could not depend upon education and writing, and exclusively dependent upon illiteracy and storytellling to teach people the moral lessons necessary to ‘get along in peace and harmony’.

    So the fertile crescent developed submissive mythicism as their source of authoritarian literature(Priests), the Chinese developed the philosophy of harmony as their source (States), and the europeans developed philosophical darwinian competition through argumentative reason (Courts).

    Those of us that study comparative civilizations, perhaps more than those that study comparative religion, see the necessity of variations in civilizational (race) wisdom literature by these various Paradigms Vocabularies, Grammars, logics. We seek what is good in each, and to elimnate what is false, foolish, or harmful in each.

    The result of course is the Natural Law of Cooperation (self determination, self determined means, sovereignty, reciprocity and tort). Which, of course, given that Europeans developed the paradigm, grammar, vocabulary, and logic necessary for its discovery and articulation, is merely another example of the tendency of europeans, precisely because of the construction of our wisdom literatures.

    First mover is not always best Last mover has an advantage in that one can learn from the mistakes of those that came before you and thus not pay the high and oft impossible cost of overcoming the entrenched metaphysics, institutions, traditions, norms, values, and yes, language and wisdom literature that exists already.

    The best example of this is the abrahamic religions’ revolt against the conquest by greece, rome, and persia, – the indo europeans – by their immitation of the persian religion, and the imitation of the european law in teh torah, and the imitation of the greco roman epic cycle, in the produciton of an anti-hero in jesus in the bible.

    Everything comes from somewhere. Evolution in retrospect is rather obvious. 😉

    Cheers

    CD

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-11 20:11:44 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1789387938431729665

  • WHY IS COMPASSION FOR JEWS WANING SO RAPIDLY AND SIGNIFICANTLY? I agree with the

    WHY IS COMPASSION FOR JEWS WANING SO RAPIDLY AND SIGNIFICANTLY?
    I agree with the outrage of the population against these miscreants who use chaos and violence to persecute Jews living in the west, and any such behavior whether against Jews or any other people – or against any people or ideology or policy at all.

    But until the Jewish people, their intellectuals, their culture and tradition recognize and accept, as Europeans have of their own history, that Jews are the source of so much of the tragedy that justly befell them, as well as the disdain for their continued behavior that is hostile to the masculine, the European, the meritocratic, and the true, as well as the interests of those elsewhere.

    Because until the Jewish people’s tradition of asymmetric morals and ethics, maximization of rent seeking and free riding, revolutionary sedition, and the preference for occupations that profit from ‘baiting into hazard’, that while providing such wealth are in fact parasitic and harmful, especially under modern fiat money, then the cycle of retaliation (oppression) will continue.

    But while white people can learn from our mistakes and adapt, it appears the Jewish people not only have no interest, but no capacity – which is a conclusion that the world will increasingly come to, and will lead to worse than even the most heinous events that have happened in the past.

    So take this crisis and learn from it, because many of us are perfectly happy that you live with us, but there are no people on earth remaining who will tolerate you living both within and against them.

    Which is the best reason for an expansionary and strong Israel, that will teach the jewish people the morals and ethics of rule and statehood that they have never seemed to be capable of learning. It may be the only means of reform of jewish people and culture.

    With Sincere Hope For A Better Future
    CD

    Reply addressees: @ShaiDavidai @Columbia

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-08 17:23:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788258507969404928

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788189807983677690

  • MORAL OUTRAGE IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, BY THE VOX POPULI Do you know what the t

    MORAL OUTRAGE IN INTERNATIONAL AFFAIRS, BY THE VOX POPULI

    Do you know what the terms “bias”, “cognitive bias”, “sex differences in moral bias”, “wishful thinking”, “projection”, “moral grandstanding” and futile attempts at “social construction” mean – and what their relationship is to developmental, cognitive, and experiential immaturity?

    There’s a relationship between developmental or cognitive maturity and moral grandstanding, particularly in the context of social construction.

    Moral grandstanding can sometimes arise from the interplay between an individual’s level of maturity both developmentally, in knowledge, and in scale of knowledge and their desire to influence social norms or perceptions.

    Let’s look a little deeper:

    Developmental and Cognitive Maturity:
    • Less mature individuals might exhibit moral grandstanding as they seek validation for their beliefs or actions due to insecurity, inexperience, or a desire to belong. They may oversimplify complex issues and express them in emotionally charged, absolutist terms.
    • As people mature cognitively and experientially, they often become more comfortable with nuance and are less driven to seek approval or moral affirmation through grandstanding.

    Experiential Maturity:
    • Personal experiences can shape one’s understanding of morality and social issues, often increasing empathy and reducing the need for moral posturing.
    • However, even those with significant life experience may engage in grandstanding if they feel their identity or worldview is threatened.

    Social Construction and Identity Formation:
    • Individuals often use moral grandstanding as a tool for identity formation and influencing social perceptions. By proclaiming moral positions publicly, people try to shape their identity as a member of a particular group.
    • This behavior is linked to the desire to construct a social image that aligns with specific norms or ideals, often driven by peer validation, especially in contexts where social media amplifies grandstanding.

    Cognitive Moral Scaling:
    Now there is also a problem of moral scaling. In that children are conscious only of being treated similarly, then we increasingly mature until we recognize that people are different in ability, phase of life, and interest, so we accept one another’s variations.

    Then we mature further if we have the experience, of running a family, or a small business, or an enterprise, or an industry, or a bureaucracy, or a government, or an attempt to organize other governments. Or worse, an attempt to geostrategically regulate the behavior of governments toward each other, extending even to war.

    This is the ‘scale’ problem of moral judgement. The most common of which is the feminine attempt to scale the moral intuition of the family over which they have both knoweldge and control, to the polity where they have no knowledge and control, and thus encourage moral hazard (bad behavior). Then they refuse to punish the bad behavior to correct it. Worse, they all to often, whether female or cognitively feminine male attempt to

    People, especially the less able, immature, ignorant, inexperience, or even experienced at a large scale, seem to project their level of moral intuition into fields where morality may result in a choice of Pareto optimums wherein all are equally unhappy, but cannot be made happier without making people even less happy, and where in some cases, particularly in war, some people must be made very very unhappy, and perhaps miserable, suffering, or dead in the present time in order to prevent an even worse consequence at some future point in time.

    So in addition to immaturity and maturity we also have a scale problem in both developmental and cognitive, and in experiential maturity.

    The solution to these issues is to train people in limits based reasoning (outcomes), first, including the heterogeneity of individuals, sexes, classes, ethnicities, civilizations, and races. And second, to provide a system of measurement that assists them in making the hard judgements when seeking the best for all not just now but for the long term future.

    Adult Behavior
    This is how adults must and do make practical decisions in the international arena. And the ignorance and immaturity (and too often femininity) of the population in a democratic polity, prevents them from speaking the whole truth and nothing but it, to a population that’s the equivalent of geostrategic preschoolers.

    This is a kind, and scientific means of explaining that most moral outrage in the field of international relations is almost entirely childish: immature.

    Affections
    CD

    Reply addressees: @Brand_der_Plank

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-08 17:09:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788255005377437696

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788243614562234596

  • “the development of “truth before face” cultures in Western Europe … led to mo

    –“the development of “truth before face” cultures in Western Europe … led to modern science and a higher trust society.”–
    Anglo < Germanic < [ Roman < Greek ]< Early European < West Indo-European.

    Original Incentives: Cattle + Metallurgy + horse/bronze/wheel Carts(Wagons) + entrepreneurial herding out of winter in the rivers into the rest of the seasons on the steppes = contract, duty, truth, oath as the organizing principle.

    Essentially cattle herders and raiders banding together to live on carts and horses(land), and pirates on ships (water) have no choice but to develop proto-democratic institutions as there is no means of concentration of capital as in flood river valleys, so no means of coercion or territorial control except voluntarily alliances in self interest.

    There is a meaningful literature on pirate economics and politics and the outcomes of the incentives are deterministic. Same applies to the Yamna et al.

    Lesson: the middle class (producers) must always govern, since they are the only class with the greater interest of the polity as their own interests.

    What’s Wrong: Post aristocratic/nobility governments were adequate, but underclass governments due to the industrial revolution and marxism and later feminism, and worst of all, multiculturalism, have moved the priority of the state from the excellence of the middle class demand for the population to demonstrate productivity AND aristocratic taste and martial values, to one that prioritizes expansion of the underclasses that can more easily be governed by the clerical class of credentialists that now runs nearly all.

    Reply addressees: @WalterIII @DwightExMachina @SeligerGrants @pmarca

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-08 16:12:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788240640846729216

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1788193509020930392

  • The Universal Grammar of Language: Measuring Existence (~750 Words) Language is

    The Universal Grammar of Language: Measuring Existence

    (~750 Words) Language is a system of measurement, made commensurable using marginal indifference in body, sense, and perception, describing all of existence that’s reducible to analogy of human experience, consisting of a sequential stream of sounds or symbols, producing increasing precision(disambiguation), that by the process of continuous recursive disambiguation(sentences) of an identity(concept, experience, scene) upon which we consent to (agree to) some degree of shared meaning (shared experience), using the universal grammar of language, of evolution, of physics, of the quantum background, of existence: Evolutionary Computation by continuous recursive disambiguation of entropy(energy, disorder) into negative entropy(mass, order), thus creating complexity by the defeat of entropy. We can describe the universe because language relies on the same logic as the universe.
    Ok so that’s high level how language works, and why it’s a sharable experience, and why we can gradually describe more of the universe with it – because it’s following the same rules as the evolution of all else in existence.
    But what ‘measurements’ does language consist of? Words. All words are names. Names of things that don’t change (nouns, pronouns, adjectives), names of things that are changing some state or other (verbs, adverbs,), names of their relations.
    How does arithmetic differs from language? Ordinary language consists of names of states, or changing states. So we can use verbs for actions(run), nouns to generalize them(movement), and adjectives that generalize temporary states (motionless).
    Vocabularies consist of words that serve the need for the totality of expression in a population in human life.
    Paradigms consist of subsets of vocabulary defining or limiting the dimensions permissible in the use of vocabulary, logic, grammar and syntax.
    Human macro-paradigms are: |Paradigmatic Evolution|: Embodiment > Anthropomorphism(counting) > Mythology(Arithmetic) > Religion(Math) > Philosophy(Geometry) > Empiricism(Algebra) > Science(Calculus) > Operationalism(Construction).
    The paradigm of Arithmetic is extremely simple. 1. All names consist of ratios to whatever identity we choose to reference. 2. All operators are +, -, *, /, =. 3. All results of operations are equal, unequal, and unequal by less than or more than.
    And the Consequences of the Vocabulary, Logic, Grammar and Syntax of Arithmetic are Very Simple
    1. Arithmetic is an extremely minimal language that consists of names (digits, glyphs of position (positional vocabulary)), phrases (positional names), verbs (operators), and agreements (unequal, equal, and modifiers, less than and more than.)
    2. The names are however context independent: they can refer to anything we choose.
    3. Positional names are unique: so they are memory, conflation, inflation, and ambiguity independent.
    4. Operations on positional names are also deterministic, operationally closed, logically closed, and ambiguity invariant, and as such arithmetic operations are interpretation independent.
    5. Positional names are unlimited in construction. So by combining unlimited construction and context independence we achieve scale independence.
    6. We perform mathematics in our minds even if we record it with tools. As such arithmetic operations are also time and cost independent.
    7. And given that it can be written, arithmetic is memory, and visualization independent.
    CLOSING
    So, while ordinary language that describes the existential world is vulnerable to context, ambiguity interpretation, scale, time, and cost variation, arithmetic REMOVES THOSE DIMENSIONS from the paradigm, with it’s simple paradigm, vocabulary, logic, and grammar. As such we have no choice but to follow simple rules of addition subtraction, multiplication and division in order to sense, perceive, and judge that which is otherwise beyond our perception, comprehension, memory, and reason.
    This is why arithmetic works.
    It’s an innovation in language and writing that extends our capacity beyond our native memory perception and reason.
    And when combined with the balance scale of double entry accounting lets us weigh and measure complex human cooperation at extraordinary scale and complexity over extraordinary time.
    Now, this is the basis of understanding all paradigms. What dimensions, terms, and agreements are necessary and which are prohibited in order to prevent human vulnerability to variations in context, ambiguity, interpretation, scale, time, and cost – and lying.
    The unification of the sciences whether formal (language and logic), physical, behavioral, or evolutionary, can be achieved through this same analysis and the disambiguation of terms such that they are universal across the sciences instead of unique to them, and the uniqueness necessary in the sciences is derived from and explain d by the universal definitions that are constructed from the first principles: evolutionary computation of the defeat of entropy by the discovery of persistency in the form of ever increasing organizations of complex mass.
    Cheers Curt Doolittle The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 04:32:39 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1787702060579750122

  • (~750 Words) Language is a system of measurement, made commensurable using margi

    (~750 Words)
    Language is a system of measurement, made commensurable using marginal indifference in body, sense, and perception, describing all of existence that’s reducible to analogy of human experience, consisting of a sequential stream of sounds or symbols, producing increasing precision(disambiguation), that by the process of continuous recursive disambiguation(sentences) of an identity(concept, experience, scene) upon which we consent to (agree to) some degree of shared meaning (shared experience), using the universal grammar of language, of evolution, of physics, of the quantum background, of existence: Evolutionary Computation by continuous recursive disambiguation of entropy(energy, disorder) into negative entropy(mass, order), thus creating complexity by the defeat of entropy. We can describe the universe because language relies on the same logic as the universe.

    Ok so that’s high level how language works, and why it’s a sharable experience, and why we can gradually describe more of the universe with it – because it’s following the same rules as the evolution of all else in existence.

    But what ‘measurements’ does language consist of?
    Words. All words are names. Names of things that don’t change (nouns, pronouns, adjectives), names of things that are changing some state or other (verbs, adverbs,), names of their relations.

    How does arithmetic differs from language?
    Ordinary language consists of names of states, or changing states. So we can use verbs for actions(run), nouns to generalize them(movement), and adjectives that generalize temporary states (motionless).

    Vocabularies consist of words that serve the need for the totality of expression in a population in human life.

    Paradigms consist of subsets of vocabulary defining or limiting the dimensions permissible in the use of vocabulary, logic, grammar and syntax.

    Human macro-paradigms are:
    |Paradigmatic Evolution|: Embodiment > Anthropomorphism(counting) > Mythology(Arithmetic) > Religion(Math) > Philosophy(Geometry) > Empiricism(Algebra) > Science(Calculus) > Operationalism(Construction).

    The paradigm of Arithmetic is extremely simple.
    1. All names consist of ratios to whatever identity we choose to reference.
    2. All operators are +, -, *, /, =.
    3. All results of operations are equal, unequal, and unequal by less than or more than.

    And the Consequences of the Vocabulary, Logic, Grammar and Syntax of Arithmetic are Very Simple

    1. Arithmetic is an extremely minimal language that consists of names (digits, glyphs of position (positional vocabulary)), phrases (positional names), verbs (operators), and agreements (unequal, equal, and modifiers, less than and more than.)

    2. The names are however context independent: they can refer to anything we choose.

    3. Positional names are unique: so they are memory, conflation, inflation, and ambiguity independent.

    4. Operations on positional names are also deterministic, operationally closed, logically closed, and ambiguity invariant, and as such arithmetic operations are interpretation independent.

    5. Positional names are unlimited in construction. So by combining unlimited construction and context independence we achieve scale independence.

    6. We perform mathematics in our minds even if we record it with tools. As such arithmetic operations are also time and cost independent.

    7. And given that it can be written, arithmetic is memory, and visualization independent.

    CLOSING

    So, while ordinary language that describes the existential world is vulnerable to context, ambiguity interpretation, scale, time, and cost variation, arithmetic REMOVES THOSE DIMENSIONS from the paradigm, with it’s simple paradigm, vocabulary, logic, and grammar. As such we have no choice but to follow simple rules of addition subtraction, multiplication and division in order to sense, perceive, and judge that which is otherwise beyond our perception, comprehension, memory, and reason.

    This is why arithmetic works.

    It’s an innovation in language and writing that extends our capacity beyond our native memory perception and reason.

    And when combined with the balance scale of double entry accounting lets us weigh and measure complex human cooperation at extraordinary scale and complexity over extraordinary time.

    Now, this is the basis of understanding all paradigms. What dimensions, terms, and agreements are necessary and which are prohibited in order to prevent human vulnerability to variations in context, ambiguity, interpretation, scale, time, and cost – and lying.

    The unification of the sciences whether formal (language and logic), physical, behavioral, or evolutionary, can be achieved through this same analysis and the disambiguation of terms such that they are universal across the sciences instead of unique to them, and the uniqueness necessary in the sciences is derived from and explain d by the universal definitions that are constructed from the first principles: evolutionary computation of the defeat of entropy by the discovery of persistency in the form of ever increasing organizations of complex mass.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 04:24:26 UTC

    Original post: https://x.com/i/articles/1787699993517686784

  • IS LOGIC OR LANGUAGE CAUSAL TO THE OTHER? Is logic dependent upon the language f

    IS LOGIC OR LANGUAGE CAUSAL TO THE OTHER?
    Is logic dependent upon the language facility, or is language dependent upon the logical facility?

    Well, logic is the application of the origin of the nervous system in the sequence of acquisition of calories, the movement then, with the addition of memory, wayfinding (navigation), and it’s search for and test of identity, consistency, correspondence, and action to bring about change (movement).

    So while there is a simple logic to evolutionary computation in the physical and biological domains, logic in the neurological domain exists prior to all other faculties the depend upon memory: the test of constant, regular, transient, inconsistent relations between stimuli in time on Bayesian scales our brains and minds are incapable of introspection upon, and require our research into the collective cooperative organization of their function to understand.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 02:00:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787663697583779841

  • What Does Language Consist of And Why Does It Work? Language is a system of meas

    What Does Language Consist of And Why Does It Work?
    Language is a system of measurement, made commensurable using marginal indifference in body, sense, and perception, describing all of existence that’s reducible to analogy of human experience, consisting of a sequential stream of sounds or symbols, producing increasing precision(disambiguation), that by the process of continuous recursive disambiguation(sentences) of an identity(concept, experience, scene) upon which we consent to (agree to) some degree of shared meaning (shared experience), using the universal grammar of language, of evolution, of physics, of the quantum background, of existence: Evolutionary Computation by continuous recursive disambiguation of entropy(energy, disorder) into negative entropy(mass, order), thus creating complexity by the defeat of entropy. We can describe the universe because language relies on the same logic as the universe.

    Ok so that’s high level how language works, and why it’s a sharable experience, and why we can gradually describe more of the universe with it – because it’s following the same rules as the evolution of all else in existence.

    But what ‘measurements’ does language consist of?
    Words. All words are names. Names of things that don’t change (nouns, pronouns, adjectives), names of things that are changing some state or other (verbs, adverbs,), names of their relations

    How does arithmetic differs from language?
    Ordinary language consists of names of states, or changing states. So we can use verbs for actions(run), nouns to generalize them(movement), and adjectives that generalize temporary states (motionless).

    Vocabularies consist of words that serve the need for the totality of expression in a population in human life.

    Paradigms consist of subsets of vocabulary defining or limiting the dimensions permissible in the use of vocabulary, logic, grammar and syntax.

    Human macro-paradigms are:
    |Paradigmatic Evolution|: Embodiment > Anthropomorphism(counting) > Mythology(Arithmetic) > Religion(Math) > Philosophy(Geometry) > Empiricism(Algebra) > Science(Calculus) > Operationalism(Construction).

    The paradigm of Arithmetic is extremely simple.
    1. All names consist of ratios to whatever identity we choose to reference.
    2. All operators are +, -, *, /, =.
    3. All results of operations are equal, unequal, and unequal by less than or more than.

    And the Consequences of the Vocabulary, Grammar and Syntax are Very Simple
    1. Arithmetic is an extremely minimal language that consists of names (digits, glyps of position (positional vocabulary)), phrases (positional names), verbs (operators), and agreements (unequal, equal, and modifiers, less than and more than.)
    2. The names are however context independent: they can refer to anything we choose.
    3. Positional names are unique: so they are memory, conflation, inflation, and ambiguity independent.
    4. Operations on positional names are also deterministic, operationally closed, logically closed, and ambiguity invariant, and as such arithmetic operations are interpretation independent.
    5. Positional names are unlimited in construction. So by combining unlimited construction and context independence we achieve scale independence.
    6. We perform mathematics in our minds even if we record it with tools. As such arithmetic operations are also time and cost independent.
    7. And given that it can be written, arithmetic is memory, and visualization independent.

    CLOSING
    So, while ordinary language that describes the existential world is vulnerable to context, ambiguity interpretation, scale, time, and cost variation, arithmetic REMOVES THOSE DIMENSIONS from the paradigm, with it’s simple paradigm, vocabulary, logic, and grammar. As such we have no choice but to follow simple rules of addition subtraction, multiplication and division in order to sense, perceive, and judge that which is otherwise beyond our perception, comprehension, memory, and reason.

    This is why arithmetic works.

    It’s an innovation in language and writing that extends our capacity beyond our native memory perception and reason.

    And when combined with the balance scale of double entry accounting lets us weigh and measure complex human cooperation at extraordinary scale and complexity over extraordinary time.

    Now, this is the basis of understanding all paradigms. What dimensions, terms, and agreements are necessary and which are prohibited in order to prevent human vulnerability to variations in context, ambiguity, interpretation, scale, time, and cost – and lying.

    The unification of the sciences whether formal (language and logic), physical, behavioral, or evolutionary, can be achieved through this same analysis and the disambiguation of terms such that they are universal across the sciences instead of unique to them, and the uniqueness necessary in the sciences is derived from and explain d by the universal definitions that are constructed from the first principles: evolutionary computation of the defeat of entropy by the discovery of persistency in the form of ever increasing organizations of complex mass.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 01:58:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787663154593366016

  • (NLI Insight) MODIFYING GRAMMAR’S PARTS OF SPEECH TO EXPLICITLY ADDRESS AGREEMEN

    (NLI Insight)
    MODIFYING GRAMMAR’S PARTS OF SPEECH TO EXPLICITLY ADDRESS AGREEMENT/DISAGREEMENT – THE EQUIVALENT IN LOGIC TO ‘EQUALITY’.
    (Problem: consistency of construction between language, arithmetic, mathematics, and logic.)

    I work in the universal grammar, universal commensurability by unification of the sciences into a consistent framework of causality by first principles.

    The discipline of Grammar today is missing Agreements (yes/no, true/false, agree/disagree like/dislike, understand/don’t understand) or “Affirmation/Negation” because the end point of any grammatical statement is either success by conveying meaning inexplicitly, or explicitly conveying some other form of agreement or not and on what basis as stated above.

    Why does this matter? Because in operational language (the test of whether something is testifiable) we require the ability to reconstruct sentences into complete sentences consisting of sequences of operational terms describing the full set of changes in state.

    And further that we can demonstrate the consistency and correspondence between actions (operations), transformations (states), language, Programmatic language, Logic (sets), Arithmetic, Mathematics, and Bayesian inference networks.

    EXPLANATION
    Here’s a brief overview of how these concepts relate to the parts of speech:

    Affirmation and Negation: This includes words like “yes,” “no,” “true,” and “false,” which can function as adverbs or interjections depending on their usage. They explicitly confirm or deny a statement, question, or command.

    Spectrum:
    • |Agreement|: Understanding/Not > Agreement/Not > Good(General)/Not > Preference/Not

    Understanding(Neutral): Understanding (Neutral Spectrum):This involves the communication of comprehension or lack thereof. Expressed through verbs like “understand,” “comprehend,” or “grasp,” and often qualified with adverbs such as “fully” or “partially” to indicate the degree of understanding. Understanding is foundational; it establishes whether the information is received and decoded correctly.

    Agreement and Disagreement(I agree with something of some nature): Reflects concurrence or discord with a given statement or proposal. It’s typically conveyed with verbs such as “agree,” “concur,” and their negatives “disagree,” “dissent.” This spectrum relates to acceptance or rejection of the information or opinions presented.

    Good (I can see how that would be beneficial): Involves evaluating the implications or consequences of the information or proposal as being beneficial or detrimental. This can be expressed through adjectives like “good,” “beneficial,” “bad,” “harmful,” and often relates to the broader impact of the agreement or understanding on the individual, group, or a broader context:

    Preference (I would prefer that) : Indicates a personal or group favor towards options or outcomes, influenced by individual or collective desires, needs, or values. Expressed through verbs like “prefer,” “favor,” and nouns such as “preference,” “choice.” This spectrum is highly subjective and reflects individual or group biases, tastes, or values.

    Disregard (I don’t care): Signifies that the information or proposal is not considered valuable, relevant, or significant enough to merit attention or action. It can be expressed with verbs like “ignore,” “dismiss,” or “overlook.” This state is crucial as it represents a conscious or unconscious decision to deprioritize the information due to perceived irrelevance, lack of benefit, or low importance

    Each of these categories plays a distinct role in communication:
    • Understanding ensures that the message is decoded.
    • Agreement establishes a basis for collaboration or conflict.
    • Good/Bad assesses the practical or moral implications of the information or decisions.
    • Preference reveals personal or collective inclinations that might influence future interactions or decisions.
    • Disregard allows individuals or groups to conserve cognitive resources by filtering out information considered unworthy of attention, thereby simplifying decision-making processes.

    So just as names of static states (nouns) or dynamic states(verbs), these names of agreements(affirmation/negation) consist of dimensions of measurement.

    So where nouns and verbs tend toward seven dimensions of measurement, here in names of agreement Agreements we see five dimensions of measurement from neutral-non-committal to enthusiasm.

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-07 01:07:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787650449287401473

  • PUBLIC DEMORALIZATION IN SCIENCE, ACADEMY, PUBLIC DISCOURSE, MEDIA, AND THE GOVE

    PUBLIC DEMORALIZATION IN SCIENCE, ACADEMY, PUBLIC DISCOURSE, MEDIA, AND THE GOVERNMENT.

    –“It’s disheartening to see how much influential science is crap and not reproducible.”–

    It is. But you know, I did a survey of ‘crank theories’ in physics about three years ago, and it turned out that one of them was rather obviously correct – at least as far as he had taken it – and I expect him to be vindicated at some point. “The universe really is that simple.”

    THE PROBLEM
    A byproduct of my work on testimony (which is technically what science consists of – the production of testifiable testimony) has led me to catalog human error, bias, deceit, and warfare in painful detail constructed from first principles (physical laws).

    IMO, from my research if we limited scientific publication and legitimacy(research), as well as reporting(media), a well as all members of the state and bureaucracy(government), to testifiable testimony (and I’m not going to cover it here, but it’s not that difficult) and held people liable for perjury on one hand, and institutions responsible for incentivizing perjury, then most of modern nonsense would disappear within the decade it took to build a body of case law, and it would both drastically reduce the population every field, rapidly increase it’s quality of output, rapidly increase compensation within the fields, and most importantly, at least in media, produce very wealthy individuals who were exceptional at providing the public with neutral information (instead of gossip, propaganda, sedition, and fraud).

    And the public would rather quickly, within a few years, restore trust in science, public intellectuals, media, and the government.

    Because that’s what trust consists of. Truth that accounts for the incentives of actors and the ends they seek to produce – most of which are false and impossible given that all ends are limited by demographic composition and geographic location.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @Griffit15999943 @KirkegaardEmil @Shiftant

    Source date (UTC): 2024-05-06 23:39:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787628346722959360

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1787621836160970904