Source: Facebook

  • Life is interesting for some, hard for many, and a lot harder if you’re stupid

    Life is interesting for some, hard for many, and a lot harder if you’re stupid.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 17:01:00 UTC

  • FOR SCIENTISTS: UNDERSTANDING JORDAN PETERSON’S INNOVATIONS 1) SYNTHESIS OF LITE

    FOR SCIENTISTS: UNDERSTANDING JORDAN PETERSON’S INNOVATIONS

    1) SYNTHESIS OF LITERATURE, PSYCHOLOGY, AND BIOLOGY

    Peterson has identified the relationship between the monomyth>Archetypes>Plots>Virtues> Personality > Reward systems > Brain structure. So he has converted Jung’s loose (pseudo-scientific) assumptions into a scientific description and integrated it into literary theory.

    In other words, he has found that by use of transformational (monomyth) narratives we circumvent the near impossibility of direct self-reflection, and learn, correct, and relearn by empathy with third party ‘characters’ instead – thereby using mirroring (empathy) to circumvent the challenges of self reflection.

    2) RESTORATION AND EXPRESSION OF STOICISM IS SCIENTIFIC TERMS

    He has taken it further into restoring our natural european religion of Stoicism by suggesting that we can use myth, literature, and self-authoring to accomplish the mindfulness of stoicism, and abandon the abrahamic superstitions that result in ignorance and decline, without moving into buddhism or other forms of ritual. That means only Stoicism produces a mindfulness of *innovation* (adaptation) of the self through action, rather than through disconnection.

    3) REFORMATION OF THERAPY(Error Correction), EDUCATION (Market Skills), AND RELIGION (Normative Discipline)

    The restoration of the stoic program and the use of literature would allow us to reform religion (trainning in the extension of kinship love, training in mindfulness, restoration of natural holidays and heroes), Education (teaching mindfulness as another ordinary discipline like vocabulary and grammar, reading, essay and argument (logic and rhetoric), measurement and mathematics).

    DEFLATING THE CENTRAL INNOVATION IN CHRISTIANITY

    Christianity trains people in only one thing: the extension of kinship love outside of immediate kin to ‘invest in’ (purchase) cooperation that otherwise would not be possible to acquire. But so does the simple imposition of common law, and the development of a middle class by commerce. In that sense, christianity (like judaism, and islam) is a primitive method of cooperation using charity and virtue signals rather than commercial interaction and material reward seeking to build trust in one another.

    THE INTEGRATION OF CHRISTIANITY AND WESTERN DEFLATIONARY TRUTH

    The uniqueness of the west is that we combined deflationary truth, deflationary institutions, and continuous competition ALONG WITH extension of kinship love. And it was that combination that allowed us to both unify in cooperation and remain separate in government and institutions.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 16:56:00 UTC

  • SO ARE YOU A PHILOSOPHER OR A SCIENTIST? —“So you are a philosopher and your h

    SO ARE YOU A PHILOSOPHER OR A SCIENTIST?

    —“So you are a philosopher and your hypothesis is that you have perfected the scientific method / empiricism?”— Rik Storey

    Hmmm …

    EMPIRICISM TESTS BUT ON DIMENSION OF REALITY

    1 – Empiricism is only one property of the scientific method, that only falsifies external correspondence.

    PHILOSOPHER OR SCIENTIST?

    2 – I do not know if I am a philosopher or a scientist who specializes in truthful speech. I do not know if the philosopher/scientist dichotomy exists any longer, or if sciences are now specialized disciplines for the discovery of truthful speech, and philosophy is reduced to the study of the decidability of preferences.

    HYPOTHESIS? COMPLETED MAX USE OF SCIENTIFIC METHOD

    3 – My hypothesis is that I have completed the scientific method within the dimensions of reality humans are capable of thinking and acting within.

    FUTURE CONSEQUENCES

    4 – My expectation is that invention will produce the same degree of progress as did the development of european common law of property, aristotelian reason, baconian empiricism, newtonian/darwinian/mengerian competition (falsification). And that it will allow us to both complete the eradication of the counter-revolution against reason by the Abrahamists, and assist us in transitioning to extremely mixed economies as we continue to reduce the demand for labor that produces multiples of returns on time, and continue to produce temporal increases in productivity using smaller and smaller numbers of people.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 15:57:00 UTC

  • DEFENSE AGAINST DISCRETIONARY RULE? The only defense against discretionary rule,

    DEFENSE AGAINST DISCRETIONARY RULE?

    The only defense against discretionary rule, as always, is the natural law, the economic self interest of the independent cult of the court, the general self interest of the militia, and the naked self interest of the monarchy.

    It’s that simple really.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 15:16:00 UTC

  • YOUR METHOD OF FREE ASSOCIATION VS YOUR METHOD OF ARGUMENT One can freely associ

    YOUR METHOD OF FREE ASSOCIATION VS YOUR METHOD OF ARGUMENT

    One can freely associate by any means that works for him. And one can falsify (test his ideas) by the means available to him. But arguments are different things. If you argue in a lower precision higher context language against a higher precision lower context language, you are either incompetent for the argument or dishonest. My problem is that I find almost everyone is dishonest by way of wishful thinking due to overinvestment in higher context, lower precision, method of argument, that was easier to learn but generally did more harm than good. In other words, every theologian, philosopher, occult literature, moral essay literature, or pseudoscientific literature that fills the need given the limited ability of the individual when he starts his investigation.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 15:10:00 UTC

  • I DON’T KNOW, ACTUALLY. IS THE TERM POLYMATH? OR IS IT JUST SPECIALIZING IN TRUT

    I DON’T KNOW, ACTUALLY. IS THE TERM POLYMATH? OR IS IT JUST SPECIALIZING IN TRUTH REGARDLESS OF FIELD?

    I don’t like the term polymath either. The problem is, I have had to master the theoretical content of nearly every field, even if I have not had to (nor would I in one lifetime be able to) master the application of that theoretical content. Because while it takes quite a bit of effort, it’s possible to deflate the ‘nonsense language’ in each field, into what constitutes a truth claim in this field, and how is it *not in fact true*.

    I’m clearly an expert in truthful speech across the fields – all of them. Which required understanding the criteria of decidability in each of them. So I would go with specialization in truthful speech across all fields, contributing to all fields. But I don’t claim to be a very good mathematician, chemist or physicist. just a judge of decidability in those fields.

    —“Don’t mathematicians specialise in being truthful in their fields? What do you mean when you say you are ‘specialised’ at determining truth in all these fields?”— Rik Storey

    No. And one of the top mathematicians will tell you that. They specialize in PROOFS, not truth. “We leave truth to philosophers, we create proofs”.

    Just as top scientists don’t say they create truth. They practice science. And science produces hypotheses, theories, and laws.

    Just as jurists don’t produce truths, they produce law (decisions).

    —“Precisely so then in what sense do you claim to specialise in truth in all these fields?”—Rik Storey

    FAILURES IN FIELDS

    – Mathematical failure of operationalism and the construction of platonism.

    – Physical science (Critical Preference) failure of parsimony and cost.

    – Law failure of natural law of decidability and strict construction.

    – Economic failure of full accounting and limits.

    – Money failure of full transition to multiple currencies.

    – Accounting failure of pooling and laundering (traceability).

    – Politics (many) failures of economics vs natural law, failure of

    monopoly and ascent vs market and legal dissent. Many, many.

    – Sociology failure of reciprocity and limits.

    – Psychology and failure of Acquisitionism.

    – Metaphysics and failure of action. the errors in philosophy are so fast that I could spend the rest of my life about it.

    – Aesthetics failure of tripartite valuation, measurement by triangulation, and reduction to acquisition.

    – Literature failure of morality and cognitive science.

    – Religion failure to abandon abrahamism for literature and cog sci.

    And that’s just touching the surface.

    I mean, this is why it’s taking a whole book. I have to produce a f-cking chapter on each damned field….sigh.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 14:52:00 UTC

  • IMHO: Men run out of energy, they don’t mature. 😉

    IMHO: Men run out of energy, they don’t mature. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 14:50:00 UTC

  • by Simon Ström We may choose at all times to cooperate, disassociate or aggress.

    by Simon Ström

    We may choose at all times to cooperate, disassociate or aggress. The market equilibrium of such agency produces an institutional phenotype which reflects the distribution of agency, and tends to approximate the highest possible degree of voluntary cooperation between peers, because that is most mutually beneficial.–Until it’s not.

    A great discrepancy in agency between agents creates more incentives for the superior part to aggress, to the point of *that* no longer being most profitable (e.g. destruction of the subjugated).

    Natural law maximizes cooperation but only among those who willingly cooperate–the militia.

    It does so as much as it discourages the granting of discounts to outgroups for a reason that in no way is profitable for the ingroup.

    A militia of sovereigns is contingent on some degree of homogeneity of agency which is why its membership is generally limited to a subset of a population.

    And, is why the age of American ‘liberty’ was also one of colonialism, ethnic cleansing and conquest, and slavery and segregation.

    (curt: well done)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 14:17:00 UTC

  • I am a scientist. The function of science is to eliminate ignorance, error, bias

    I am a scientist. The function of science is to eliminate ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion and obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit from our speech. The fact that you have confidence in intuition and less so in reason, is merely because you lack the ability to reason and the knowledge required to.

    What you ‘believe’ is a measure of your stupidity : how much more evolution you require before converting from animal to human.

    if you choose various beliefs, you are merely choosing to demonstrate your lack of evolution.

    The question is whether humans continue to domesticate you, whether humans enslave you, or whether humans exterminate you. Since you animals cannot win against humans if we choose to enslave or exterminate you.

    The only alternative is cooperation under natural law. Under which you can believe what you wish as long as you do no harm to the commons with it.

    Which is nearly impossible.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 13:51:00 UTC

  • Hehe

    Hehe


    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-08 13:20:00 UTC