Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • (from elsewhere) Prof Wildberger: I love that you’re trying to de-platonize math

    (from elsewhere)

    Prof Wildberger:

    I love that you’re trying to de-platonize mathematics, and return it to the sciences.

    Mathematical platonism uses a grammar and semantics of fiction (it’s technically a ‘Fictionalism’). And I can understand why some people have a natural tendency, out of historical bias, and out of the influence of hermeneutics (religious and scriptural interpretation) to fictionalize mathematics.

    In doing so they convert it from a science of measurement of constant relations in increasing dimensions into a linguistic ANALOGY – thereby obscuring (losing) the causal properties of mathematics (measurement of constant relations in increasing dimensions using positional naming).

    And that is the reason it’s both difficult to teach people (when it should be trivial), and forces us to rely on memorization rather than ‘understanding’. Where “understanding” means ‘in the context of existential reality, and therefore an extension of existential reality.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-21 11:03:00 UTC

  • “Nature emplaces rewards (incentives) for those who affect change in state for i

    —“Nature emplaces rewards (incentives) for those who affect change in state for it’s king: complexity. We march to its elegance or suffer its horrid death. There’s no escape from Nature.” — William L. Benge

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-21 10:13:00 UTC

  • HOW DO YOU DEFINE PHILOSOPHY? Philosophy. Mindfulness. Dominance over the mind i

    HOW DO YOU DEFINE PHILOSOPHY?

    Philosophy. Mindfulness. Dominance over the mind in the face of the unknown. Using grammar of technology. Tech(philio) vs Fiction(religion). Deflation vs Inflation. Mindfulness was necessary at ‘worry’ post-human-scales. All civ’s encountered demand for mindfulness as scale increased – and trust decreased. All about the same time. Probably due to trade. Westerners used competing (class) variants of mindfulness. Science can in fact provide mindfulness for those with the ‘ability’. Sport, Family, Work, Ritual, Wealth, Science Philosophy/Reason, Fiction, Religion. All can provide mindfulness (Disciplined thought in the face of the unknown/complexity). The principle problem of scale was creating mindfulness through trust. The only question is whether one’s form of mindfulness encouraged adaptation (philosophy > reason > science) or discouraged it (religion > abrahamism).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-21 08:25:00 UTC

  • Every increase in explanatory power has been the result of a counter intuitive d

    Every increase in explanatory power has been the result of a counter intuitive discovery that caused a costly revision of existing categories, relations and values. Just how it is. Your simple sacred cows die. New generations of superior sacred cows evolve. The slaughter continues anew. And in this stepwise fashion evolution leaves behind the detritus of past utility. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-20 19:53:00 UTC

  • metaphysical levels: commensurability of operations(changes in state) of constan

    metaphysical levels: commensurability of operations(changes in state) of constant relations. We have not made the intellectual transition to external coincidences of constant relations at increasing scales ( see lie groups). We are stuck in linearity of relations just as pre einsteinian thought was stuck in length. And we are just beginning to change from studying measurements of averages in state to operations possible to cause changes in state..

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-20 19:36:00 UTC

  • I just want to point out that hoppe refers to economic science (falsification) b

    I just want to point out that hoppe refers to economic science (falsification) but he himself relies entirely upon economic rationalism (justification), And he confuses philosophical positivism (which never occurred) with scientific skepticism (which is how science is practiced).

    What’s the difference? Justification (excuse making) = bottom up rationalization. Positivism = justification through empiricism (top down). Science: a MARKET for ‘recipes’, where the stories (theories) provide searches (opportunities) for applications of the recipe, and where application of the recipe refines or falsifies the searches (opportunities). Science functions as just another market for actions (recipes). A market laundered of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, and deceit by the continual use of measurements in a competition between logical (mental) and physical instruments.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-20 13:10:00 UTC

  • THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRUTH AND MARKETS? —“Curt, What is the relationship b

    THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN TRUTH AND MARKETS?

    —“Curt, What is the relationship between truth and markets?”— A Friend

    || Truth > Trust > Trade Velocity > Wealth.

    All economic advancement consists of saving (compression) of time by the increase of productivity.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-20 09:56:00 UTC

  • “Occultism to some people seems to be an intellectual diabetes from having too m

    —“Occultism to some people seems to be an intellectual diabetes from having too much time and too little responsibility in their lives. Who has time to invest in such stupid crap? I mean, I have kids for Christ’s sake. And a job, and I’m enrolled in university courses in the meantime. My demand for practical utility and therefore empirical truth, is very noticeably higher than that of childless consumers of intellectual narcotics.”— A Friend

    Literature of escapism comes in many forms. ‘Philosophy’ and ‘essay’ is one of them.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-20 07:52:00 UTC

  • Grammar: the organization and expression of constant relations

    Grammar: the organization and expression of constant relations.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-19 18:44:00 UTC

  • “Curt can you point us in the direction of where we could find proofs or researc

    —“Curt can you point us in the direction of where we could find proofs or research for this?”–Rob McMullan

    RE: <“Different cultures do rely on different methods of argument, semantic relations, and definitions of truth. West is uniquely empirical: externally correspondent. All others rely on some version of wisdom literature.”>

    Um. I draw from so many disciplines and try to provide commensurability across them. And while there exist works on comparative religion, comparative mythology, comparative law, comparative literature, comparative linguistics, I do not know of anyone who has reduced the analysis to the dimensions of reality, the dimensions of argument, and provided comparative definitions of truth (other than perhaps the work by Fukuyama), or of argument in those dimensions, nor comparative definitions of methods of argument other than law. (Even if it is law that determines the method of argument of each people.) THis is why science has evolved into the universal language: that truth and argument are also possible to state in universally commensurable terms regardless of the methods of argument in different civilizations.

    So, aside from Fukuyama and Huntington, I don’t know who else to recommend.

    I mean, the idea of competing or comparative ‘sciences’ is kind of nonsense, really. Measurements are either universally commensurable or they aren’t measurements.

    All other authors are comparing differences, and some are explaining why those historical differences evolved.

    I’m explaining why ALL those differences exist and what those differences are capable of producing.

    And that by continuing the pursuit of truth we discover that the reason for western advancement in the ancient in modern world is purely scientific. (real).

    Truth. Markets. Eugenics.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-11-19 18:18:00 UTC