1) identity tests categories.
2) logic tests internal consistency.
3) action tests correspondence. (empirical, operational)
4) rational action tests incentives.
5) reciprocity tests morality.
6) Narrative analogy to perception describes reality (coherence)
Reality is explained by narrative, and the narrative survives falsification by identity, logic, action, reason, reciprocity.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 17:48:00 UTC
Identity(category), Proof(logic), Correspondent(science), Operational(causal), Reasonable(incentives), Reciprocal(moral), Complete(True).
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-14 12:23:22 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/885837120501428225
Reply addressees: @ahaspel
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/879409634028789760
IN REPLY TO:
@ahaspel
Valid, complete arguments are known as proofs. The rest is philosophy.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/879409634028789760
1) Democracy is a means of selecting priorities among peoples with similar interests.
2) Markets are a means of cooperating across dissimilar interests.
3) Monopoly (Majority) rule is a means of circumventing cooperation between dissimilar interests, and institutionalizing theft – when every theft creates agitation and is a lost opportunity for cooperation.
The genders (men/women), the classes, the institutions (force, trade, talk), as well as the federation, the state, the locality, and the neighborhood, all require local democracy and a hierarchy of markets in everything.
Majoritarianism was fine when we had a house of lords/senate of regions, and a house of small business owners (farmers and merchants). It stopped being fine almost immediately. And it ceased being fine the moment the industrial revolution kicked in, and different regions developed different nations and no longer shared common interests.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-10 10:22:00 UTC
the people produce
the church(academy) teaches
the government administers
the treasury insures (needs to divided)
the state rules (adjudicates)
the militia defends
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-09 07:18:00 UTC
individual action —- cooperative action
industriousness —- pro-sociality
private property —- common property
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-08 10:59:00 UTC
THE THREE GOALS: NATURAL LAW, ARTIFICIAL WOMBS, SETTLING THE STARS.
The most important innovation on behalf of white people and western civilization, is the artificial womb. By harvesting eggs and sperm, even without much genetic modification, we can make armies by selective breeding with or without the cooperation of women, and with or without the limitation of the few exceptional women, and with or without the rate and tolerance for births of exceptional women.
So you might say the stars, and I will say the artificial womb. and I will venture that the artificial womb will get us to the stars faster than is otherwise possible. If for no other reason than we are no longer paying the high cost keeping human beings alive for much of the journey.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-01 08:24:00 UTC
A RELIGION OF THE POSSIBLE, TRUE, GOOD, AND BEAUTIFUL
1:
Transcendence/Agency/Sovereignty;
The mono-myth/archetypes/plots/virtues;
The Fables, Myths, Legends, Histories
2.
The birth, oath, feast, marriage, death rituals;
The festivals of life, nature, universe;
The temples to our Heroes.
Personal meditation
3:
Personal Fitness
Competitive industry,
Competitive sport,
Competitive war,
4:
The law of testimony;
The natural law of cooperation/market government;
The physical laws. (laws of nature)
That will provide a religion unlike any other.
And all of it is possible, true, good, and beautiful.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-28 14:14:00 UTC
CAN WE MEASURE TRUTHFULNESS?
(reposted to the main page for others to view)
Degrees of Precision In Truthfulness
4 – Imagined = we imagine it is possible because we cannot reason that it is impossible.
3 – Empirical = Correlative, observable, measurable (not quantifiable)
2 – Narrative = Sympathetic (sequential, brevity).
1 – Demonstrable = causal (descriptive, operational).
0 – Perfect (ideal) Parsimony (Name(referrer) of transformation rules (referent). In other words, names of functions, and functions.
The problem as I see it is that any narrative (form of brevity for the purpose of meaning) must both add information (sympathetic analogy for transfer of meaning by association) and remove information (operational detail overloading sympathetic analogy), thus leaving us with Names that refer to sequences (recipes) of operations (or natural transformations), or the sequences (recipes) for statements of Truthfulness (warrantied by due diligence of knowledge of Truth).
Since all knowledge is fungible and justification impossible, I do not make the traditional error of categorizing knowledge as justified belief (confidence in knowledge). I treat every opportunity-for-knowledge (hypothesis) from identity through causality as knowledge and truthfulness and falsehood as a measure of it.
I treat truth candidacy as an estimate by triangulation of the survival from due diligence under testimonialism – which unlike CR includes provides a checklist of due diligences (measures) for each dimension of reality, including costs of transformation – which we can use to compare estimates of truth. This differs from CP in that I am unable to falsify the hypothesis that cost of transformation is a proxy for opportunity cost, and therefore in matters physical(natural) and sentient(human), all other things being equal, appears (empirically and rationally) to inform CP if not solve it. Neither nature nor man refuse optimum opportunities. Nature cannot. Man appears not to. (he does err however.) I can find no existential counter examples. This roughly equates to the scientific method’s rational(logical) use of ‘parsimony’ and provides explanation for it.
Justification is necessary in matters of the export of ethical and moral risk. So it’s not that justification has no value to man. Justification is how we defend both error (loss), and success (gain). But justification is a moral-ethical question, whereas adjudication (truth) exists independently of consequences.
The fact that we must struggle to deflate our own behaviors in this way is indicative of our evolution as negotiating and cooperating creatures not tellers-of-truth. We evolved sympathy and utility. And truth is but a consequence of the pragmatism of negotiation.
So to some degree I tend to think in terms of the truthfulness (survival from due diligence) of our knowledge, not ‘knowledge of truth’ (justification of our knowledge). But in practice they are the same thing from different sides of the coin: survival from due diligence against falsehood. I think I am more sensitive to this matter because CR/CP provide no means of measurement (deflation), whereas I have provided the same deflation in all possible dimensions of knowledge that has been applied to existential and pure relations by mathematics.
I hope this is interesting for you. I don’t mean to change your mind, but merely to walk through it and see if you have criticisms, as well as to provide others with an education in what seems to be a fairly rare bit of expertise: the transition from justificationary(constructive) to evolutionary(survival) truth.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-28 10:17:00 UTC
WE FACED OUR IGNORANCE WITH COURAGE AND DESTROYED SUPERNATURALISM
Can we face our ignorance, and this time, destroy our pseudoscience and pseudorationalism?
WHEREAS
1) Operational descriptions are perfectly testable – informationally complete.
2) Names of operational descriptions for brevity – but at the expense of lost information.
3) Names of categories of operational descriptions for brevity – but at the expense of lost information.
4) Conflation of names of categories of operational descriptions for (a) transfer of meaning by association, (b) admission of ignorance, (c) use to obscure ignorance (d) use for deception.
5) Use of abstract categories “thing”, “is/are/was/were” for (a) brevity (b) admission of ignorance (c) to obscure ignorance (d) for deception.
CONVERSELY
One can speak entirely in operational descriptions limiting one’s self to operational grammar. The uncomfortable problem that results, is the near universal admission of our near universal ignorance, and our use of pretentious prose to obscure our ignorance and deceit.
This is what I have learned from our failure to defeat the pseudosciences and pseudo-rationalisms of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-26 19:47:00 UTC
ARE HUMANS ALIKE?
1) The Wise make arguments to incentives and institutions
2) The Fools make arguments to law and government
3) The Youth make arguments to morality and shame
4) The Children make arguments to approval and disapproval.
1) we are alike ‘enough’ or we could not empathize.
2) we are alike ‘enough in empathy that we can cooperate
3) we are alike ‘enough’ that we can cooperate on means if not ends.
4) we are unlike ‘enough’ to choose not to cooperate on means or ends.
5) we are unlike ‘enough’ to conflict in ethics and politics
6) we are unlike ‘enough’ that we war nearly constantly.
7) we are unlike ‘enough’ to engage in culture-cide, and genocide.
AFAIK,
(a) median intelligence is proxy for neoteny (domestication) but not
morality, and;
(b) median intelligence determines demand for habits, norms, traditions and institutions, and ;
(c) norms, traditions, and institutions determine the degree of trust that is possible even if unachieved, and;
(d) the degree of trust determines the productivity of a polity relative to its competitors.
Therefore
(e) the standard of any polity is determined not by its best but by the size of its worst. In other words, the only way to improve a polity is the reduction of the scale of the underclasses.
MARKET LIMIT
The limit to all markets from commercial to reproduction to association, is whenever the benefit to the self, even in fully informed, productive, voluntary exchange, produces externalities that impose costs upon the retained capital (in all forms) of others.
Ergo, there is a limit to free trade, and a limit to free association before one is merely profiting from the imposition of costs upon others while claiming one is virtuous.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 07:41:00 UTC