I don’t think a lot of people will be able to wield the epistemology all that well – although I might be wrong. But the number of people who will make arguments, and make them better and more accessible than I do is large. I mean, I see this stuff showing up everywhere. The terms. The ideas. The arguments. And the people who have been around for years are better than I am at the inspirational.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:46:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:43:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:35:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:34:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:33:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 15:31:00 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
( Um. Ok. So 250MG of Magnesium seems to have a profound effect. So does GABA. So does Melatonin. So does red meat. So does any amount of physical exercise. But what does that mean? )
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 14:24:28 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
Yes, Peterson has a self authoring course, but not the ‘framing’, and I think Massimo puts books out on the framing but not a course.
Effectively speaking stocism is a scientific religion. Or rather a religious and philosophical system that does not conflict with science.
In my understanding, we are trying to (by accident) recreate the stoic philosophy (religion).
It was quite a while before I understood that’s what I was doing. I think Massimo is doing it intentionally. I haven’t got to peterson yet to ask if he’s knowingly doing it.
I have reasons to prefer peterson’s method. My only question is whether or not he should use biblical stories or not. And my preference is ‘no’, because I want to kill abrahamism (sophism) while at the same time preserve literary analogy (wisdom literature)
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 14:14:58 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
WHY DO YOU CONSTRAIN ARGUMENT TO THE MATERIAL AND COMPUTATIONAL?
The reason I stick so rigidly with the computational model and existential (material) model is to close the door completely to abrahamism(jewish), rationalization(french) and phenomenalism(german) as means of self deception.
The computational and material model explains the phenomenological. With it we can discuss the phenomenological without attributing CAUSATION TO IT.
Our experiential world is the result of the physical and computational.
Most philosophical and argumentative systems measure the experiential rather than merely observe that the experiential is a measurement (consequence) of the material and computational.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 14:12:14 UTC
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
The problem with teaching stoicism is that it’s expensive in teaching-time. Buddhism expensive in personal time. And by comparison religion allows mass production on the cheap.
Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 13:42:46 UTC