Form: Reply

(repost)
—“Hi Curt, I am greatly intrigued by the submissions in support of your work. If you don’t mind, could you kindly illuminate as to the central thesis of this ISM.”—

[I]n simple terms, it is the completion of the Aristotelian project, by expanding Aristotelian realism, naturalism, and empiricism from the (easy) physical sciences to the (harder) cognitive, psychological, and social sciences by the addition of the grammars (language, metaphysics), operationalism and reciprocity, which we learned in the 20th and 21st century. In modern terms it would mean the completion of the scientific method.

CENTRAL THESIS:

1) The human grammatical facility consists of continuous recursive disambiguation. We construct meaning, transfer meaning, then falsify meaning against error, in iterations.

All knowledge evolves by the same method:

Stimulus (observation > auto-association > model > prediction > intuition > valuation) > FreeAssociation (Test by reason) > Hypothesis (test by logic) > Theory (test by action) > Convention (Test by Adversarialism – Survival in the market for Application)

2) All language consists of measurements that are precise, sufficient, and true, or imprecise, insufficient, and false.

3) Those measurements consist of combinations of human faculties: a) sensation, b) perception, c) intuition, d) reason-calculation-computation, e) action. And we can, and have, disassembled all language into those dimensions. And those dimensions are limited. And they also include limited precision (ex: always has been, has been for some time, just has been, is being, just will be, will be for some time, always as been.)

3) We can deflate all language into pure measurements (mathematics), or inflate language into narrations, or inflate language into deceptions: a) loading, framing, obscuring, suggesting, b) fictions c) sophistry->idealism spectrum, d) magic->pseudoscience spectrum, and d) occult->supernatural spectrum. We reorganize the definition of language to refer to each of these as grammars that include permissible dimensions and the logics possible within those permissible dimensions.

4) Because of this, we can create a most parsimonious, universally commensurable, value-neutral language across all fields, by conversion of all speech regardless of dimension into measurements using human faculties, in promissory form, in complete sentences, absent the word to be, from an observer’s point of view, in operational language, consisting of a complete list of complete changes in state.

5) We can create a checklist of due diligences to test this value neutral universal language for those dimensions of constant relations (logical consistency) possible for humans: identity, logical, empirical, operational, rational, reciprocal, limited, fully accounted within those limits, and if it passes those tests it is not false. Then we must ask if it is sufficient to meet the demand for infallibility for the question at hand, and with in the limits of liability if we err.

6) This resulting language and method looks a great deal like writing contract law in programming language for very good reasons that are probably obvious: operational logic of actions (engineering) versus set logic of language (scripture, law, text). Far greater precision and far greater exposure of false claims due to ignorance.

7) We can write constitutions and laws in this language that prevent the use of every possible method of deceit, and therefore extend our law from defense of physical property to defense of information itself. The idea being that we can end immoral and false commercial, academic, and political speech (where religious speech is also political), so that the people are not constantly lied to by everyone.

The result? Eradication of deceit from the informational commons. Resulting in Trust, Personal, Social, economic, political velocity resulting in prosperity (and greater equality).

SECONDLY

It explains the ((())) method of destroying civilizations from within by fomenting hatred using the female technique of undermining false promise baiting into hazard, under plausible deniability and freedom from liability.

In this case it is to blame white people for adapting to the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of the universe, which by design ends their ability to operate as an organized crime family.

It also explains the success of marxism, neo-marxism, postmodernism, feminism, human difference denialism, political correctness, and shouting down – destruction of harmony of european peoples.