Form: Short Note

Most advanced subject in P-Operationalism, that so far I can’t find a single person that grasps it – even though my video on the 20th century of mysticism has been around forever..

—“A preference for truth or for sincerity as a method may be prejudice based on some personal standard, inconsistent, in politics, with practical good”– – Keynes —“Is Keynes, (an Anglo aristocrat?) in the same tradition as The Enemy or is it a different type of lying?”–@TruthRespecter

1) He’s British, Eccentric, Wealthy, and Gay 2) He’s a marxist (it’s in his notes) 3) He’s restating marx in quantitative redistributive innumeracy (mathematical pseudoscience) 4) He did not understand the consequences to capital – hayek sure did; 5) Nor how people would run with it; 6) Hayek did and thought he should counter him, but he lacked the language (or didn’t use it). This is Advanced P-Operationalism, where the 20thc Problem with the sciences is consistent between (right-wrong): Poincare-Cantor, Hilbert-Einstein, Hayek-Keynes, Turing-Godel, Doolittle-Mises, With Bridgman (Physics) understanding Einstein’s partial success without understanding Einstein’s failure. Hilbert’s failure understanding Brouwer, and his failure to correct Einstein as has led to the current condition where Economics is frozen and off the rails Physical science is frozen and off the rails No progress has been made in law, political science, or social science. Education in general is a catastrophe.  

Most advanced subject in P-Operationalism, that so far I can’t find a single person that grasps it – even though my video on the 20th century of mysticism has been around forever..

—“A preference for truth or for sincerity as a method may be prejudice based on some personal standard, inconsistent, in politics, with practical good”– – Keynes —“Is Keynes, (an Anglo aristocrat?) in the same tradition as The Enemy or is it a different type of lying?”–@TruthRespecter

1) He’s British, Eccentric, Wealthy, and Gay 2) He’s a marxist (it’s in his notes) 3) He’s restating marx in quantitative redistributive innumeracy (mathematical pseudoscience) 4) He did not understand the consequences to capital – hayek sure did; 5) Nor how people would run with it; 6) Hayek did and thought he should counter him, but he lacked the language (or didn’t use it). This is Advanced P-Operationalism, where the 20thc Problem with the sciences is consistent between (right-wrong): Poincare-Cantor, Hilbert-Einstein, Hayek-Keynes, Turing-Godel, Doolittle-Mises, With Bridgman (Physics) understanding Einstein’s partial success without understanding Einstein’s failure. Hilbert’s failure understanding Brouwer, and his failure to correct Einstein as has led to the current condition where Economics is frozen and off the rails Physical science is frozen and off the rails No progress has been made in law, political science, or social science. Education in general is a catastrophe.