TWEETS: TEACHING HISTORY, LOGIC, GRAMMAR, RHETORIC, TESTIMONY
The reason we do not teach History, Logic, Grammar, and Rhetoric is so that the left can indoctrinate postmodern propaganda.
If the reason we enforce education is self-defense, then why not enforce history, grammar, logic, rhetoric in self-defense?
Enforce the study of history, so that those of us who have studied history, are not the victims of those who haven’t.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-03 07:29:00 UTC
Ok Andy Curzon. You were right about coffee. Damn. The effect is substantive and accumulative. The effect is replaceable with exercise (oxygenation). This is gonna hurt. I man needs a vice, doesn’t he?
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-03 07:03:00 UTC
Please don’t be stupid.
What is correspondence other than pairing?
What is mathematics other than pairing?
Mathematics consists largely of removing properties from (deterministic)reality and constructing deductions with decreasing degrees of information.
Logic consists of removing properties of from reality and constructing deductions with decreasing degrees of information.
What is communication other than pairing?
We use different terms but we pair (compare) and differentiate (remainder)
We can use the oppposite process as well: we can restore correspondnce with reality in order to test whether our hypotheses can supply the information missing.
This is how we come to understand BOTH critical rationalism and its complietion with operationalism and morality.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-03 06:01:00 UTC
—“NATO as a whole – and Europe in particular – face various and complex security challenges, which are often ignored by European societies. It is a false perception that if we live in peace then our security will not be challenged. The world is going through intensive changes, which come together with serious challenges. If we take a look at the neighbourhood of Europe we can see conflicts and wars almost everywhere: in Ukraine, in the Middle East, in North-Africa. And we can add some areas of the Western-Balkans to the list, where the situation is still fragile. At the same time we have to cope with new challenges, like cyber threat, too. Money is essential to address these challenges properly.”—Hungarian Defense Minister
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-03 05:51:00 UTC
WORTH REPEATING
(read this as a lament that the anglos foolishly truncated the german evolution into empire and the full maturity of german thought.)
***It’s that as intellectual work, excuse-making (the german rationalist model) and social engineering (the anglo legal model) are for different purposes: reinforcing the existing behaviors (germans) as a means of territorial defense, and colonizing new people (anglos) as a means of expanding commercial empires. Anglos and Romans dominated the world with Law and accounting, insured by arms. Germany never got to her empire phase because the Anglos and Russians (foolishly) stopped her. But if it had happened, then germans would have had to make the same transition from a philosophy of justification (how we should be) to a philosophy of law (we can be anything but what we must not be).
Once you understand this difference between justificationary reinforcement of existing ideas and operational transformation to new ideas, you’ll understand the difference between german domestic philosophy and anglo roman imperial philosophy and why germans use new-Christianity rationalism and anglos use rule of law.***
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 06:02:00 UTC
ELEGANTLY STATED
—“The great pull of the German justificationary arts & letters is evident, perhaps most so on Germans ourselves. They have thus achieved their aspired historical function (in Curt’s terms, Nietzsche/Wagner etc. are not pushing objective arguments, but aim to inspire/rally around ideals).
And yet our ascendancy to empire was cut short, therefore no corresponding corpus filosofico in terms of running the thing, resolving legal disputes, governance etc. There’s no Confucius to our Yüe Fei, no Shogun to our Emperor, no workout scheme to our pre-session pump-up video.
But there are traces of what might eventually have spawned a German empirico-legalistic school: the medieval town codes, or the historical beginnings of what would become Austrian economics come to mind; Hanseatic statutes, possibly.
Thing is, those solely romantically inclined have little need for that missing corpus, while those naturally duty-bound, quiet (unheroic) and industrious (the vast majority of Germans in my estimation) don’t even have the vocabulary to begin to articulate what they’re missing. Cheers mates”— Benjamin Lange
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 06:00:00 UTC
https://www.quantamagazine.org/20160524-mathematicians-bridge-finite-infinite-divide/WHY OPERATIONALISM MATTERS IN MATHEMATICS: DEMYSTIFYING AND EXPLAINING THE ART OF DEDUCTION OF DETERMINISTIC PHENOMENON WITH DECREASTING AMOUTS OF INFORMATION.
This subject is interesting if for no other reason than mathematical language developed out of a form of mysticism(platonism), and has retained some of those characteristics across over two thousand years.
The intuitionists failed to create the reformation that would have made these subjects quite simple to understand.
We have reformed physics from the Aristotelian “first mover” category of language. We have reformed morality to be expressed in economic language. but we have not reformed the language of mathematics, thereby reducing mathematical platonism to operational (existential and computable) axioms.
If we do so, the discipline of mathematics has evolved as much by eliminating axioms of correspondence (or asserting axioms of non-correspondence), then leaving mathematicians to attempt to find methods of deduction with fewer and fewer properties to work with.
From this perspective, mathematical reasoning has been an exercise in the exploration of deduction of deterministic systems of correspondence (pairs) using decreasing information because of decreasing axioms (rules) of correspondence.
Or more simply said, mathematics evolved from the pairing of stones while counting sheep, then giving names to the stones, then positional names to larger quantities of stones. then to sets of stones. Then to ratios of stones. Then space, then time. Then deductions from stones, space, and time.
So we have merely increased the properties (axioms) and removed the properties (axioms) of correspondence with reality and explored how to perform deductions with more or fewer properties (axioms) of correspondence.
That we have not reformed the philosophy and language mathematics as we have in other fields is due to the fact that the intuitionists in all fields (Bridgman/physics, Mises in economics, Brouwer/mathematics, and various authors in Psychology) possessed different incentives and different threats to their credibility. Interestingly, psychology has reformed through the use of ‘operationism’, the physical sciences have reformed in large part, economics has not reformed, and mathematics has not. And the answer why is interesting: psychology was under threat of classification as a pseudoscience threatening incomes. Economists currently fight that battle, but the political utility of models plus the extensive time that passes (a generation or more) before policy makes itself visible, provides convenient escape from criticism. Mathematics has not in large part because unlike psychology, economics, or the physical sciences **it’s external consequences are irrelevant**. Meaning that there is no pressure to reform, because mathematicians outside of the sciences have no feedback mechanism to force them to.
There is nothing magical or mysterious about mathematics. What’s interesting is how we add and subtract properties of reality in order to created models that retain determinism and allow us to perform deductions with decreasing information, about scale independent patterns.
The only reason it’s even vaguely interesting is because the human mind is so easily overwhelmed with but a few short term memory facts, and a few axis of causality. Almost all mathematical operations (transformations) are determined by the capacity of our minds, and greater minds might not need symbols and operators of similar simplicity in order to see deductions or relations of far greater complexity.
So, mathematics is trivial really. But if you talk about it in magic words, it’s going to sound magical. When really, it’s just a matter of not being able to sense relations with our mind, the same way we cannot sense distant objects in the heavens with our eyes, the same way we cannot hear distant sounds with our ears or feel subtle vibrations with our feet.
We use tools of all forms to increase the power of our senses, and mathematics consists of states and operations that humans can operate and sense in complex deterministic models what we cannot sense and perceive without states and operations to assist us.
The moment you add or remove an axiom (command, or fact) the results are deterministic. The interesting part is only that we are developing the art of deduction for increasingly informationally sparse relations.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 05:09:00 UTC
(to a friend who makes the common german mistake of conflating sentimental agreement with rational and empirical necessity, with the cost and ability to change the behavior of polities.)
Friend,
I think you are falling into the trap common of people with germanic backgrounds, and that is to attribute truth to that which just merely sounds right to you. Germans are germans because of the heavy social indoctrination of the culture, and genetics, and not because of the many hundred of ‘excuses’ philosophers make to justify german behavior as a good and to isolate german behavior from competition by foreign behaviors, models, and ideas.
These german authors are poets, romanticists, secular priests (opinion reinforcers), but they are not scientists (change agents).
German aristocratic ideas don’t spread if you haven’t noticed. Aristocratic ideas are never spread. THEY ARE IMPOSED
I know it will not help you to hear this. And it’s not that I don’t agree with your sentiments.
It’s that as intellectual work, excuse-making (the german rationalist model) and social engineering (the anglo legal model) are for different purposes: reinforcing the existing behaviors (germans) as a means of territorial defense, and colonizing new people (anglos) as a means of expanding commercial empires. Anglos and Romans dominated the world with Law and accounting, insured by arms. Germany never got to her empire phase because the Anglos and Russians (foolishly) stopped her. But if it had happened, then germans would have had to make the same transition from a philosophy of justification (how we should be) to a philosophy of law (we can be anything but what we must not be).
Once you understand this difference between justificationary reinforcement of existing ideas and operational transformation to new ideas, you’ll understand the difference between german domestic philosophy and anglo roman imperial philosophy and why germans use new-Christianity rationalism and anglos use rule of law.
So, in summary, you can only justify what exists. You cannot spread it.
Hence, german philosophy is nice only once you agree with it. It’s no use in converting anyone.
It’s possible to use anglo law and argument and science to convert by force of institutions, and then reinforce (make heroic) with german philosophy. But that’s all.
German justificationism(what to do), and Anglo Criticism (what not to do).
German culture is amazing for its oppressive inculcation of good behavior. But the philosophy just justifies the ancient germanic oath, and does not create it in the first place.
Sure, scribblers matter. I’m a scribbler too. But law is a method of involuntary persuasion, religion a method of social persuasion, and literature a means of intellectual suggestion for the middle classes.
Rule requires rule. And law provides the logic and method of ruling.
Curt Doolittle
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 03:36:00 UTC
REMOTE AUTOMATED TESTING SERVICES?
(One of you fine gentlemen who visited me here in Ukraine in the past few months, was putting an awesome product on the market that I wanted to look into but I either didn’t write it down, or can’t find the note. Can you contact me please?)
PS: I loved your jewelry. 🙂
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 03:16:00 UTC
(tidbits)
All system architecture is responsibility. All software programming is syntax. All UI is concentration-cost. UX is incentives. All project management is scope and resources. And everyone worries about time.
Source date (UTC): 2016-06-02 02:08:00 UTC