Feb 8, 2020, 1:18 PM Given the Human logical facility Given the Human grammatical facility Given the Logics of free association(justification), the logics of language (internal consistency – inference), and operational logic (existential possibility – demonstrated); Given possibilities for decidability of nonsensical, undecidable, sufficient for action, truth candidate, tautology, falsehood. Are the logics falsificationary or justificationary in precedence?
Source: Original Site Post
-
Eliminating the Verb to Be (copula). Is It Required?
Feb 8, 2020, 6:54 PM
—“Is failure to use ePrime in P an error? Why/not?”—Jonathan Besler
Brandon Hayes: No; you can speak truthfully without speaking operationally. Curt Doolittle: Also. You can falsify another’s speech by translating it to operational prose. Again, like many things, once you learn the form you will identify when people are lying, and how they are lying, and gain the ability to explain how they are lying – including why they might be. And if someone questions the truth of your statements you can expand them to the fully operational form and demonstrate that you were merely exercising convenience. Just recall that lying in P means you failed due diligence – you don’t need to intend to. Its like transferring stolen property. You were involved and participated in the crime because you failed due diligence. Edit
-
Eliminating the Verb to Be (copula). Is It Required?
Feb 8, 2020, 6:54 PM
—“Is failure to use ePrime in P an error? Why/not?”—Jonathan Besler
Brandon Hayes: No; you can speak truthfully without speaking operationally. Curt Doolittle: Also. You can falsify another’s speech by translating it to operational prose. Again, like many things, once you learn the form you will identify when people are lying, and how they are lying, and gain the ability to explain how they are lying – including why they might be. And if someone questions the truth of your statements you can expand them to the fully operational form and demonstrate that you were merely exercising convenience. Just recall that lying in P means you failed due diligence – you don’t need to intend to. Its like transferring stolen property. You were involved and participated in the crime because you failed due diligence. Edit
-
Similar Ideas
Feb 9, 2020, 10:23 AM
—“Hi Curt, have you read, “Speed & Politics” by Paul Virilio?”—Jame B
No, because I find continental philosophical work sophomoric. But you will find the same argument in my work’s restructuring of economics as time, and therefore all we do is increase the rate of production in time through increasing division of labor and knowledge. So yes I say the same thing but as usual in anglo scientific rather than continental literary exposition.
—“Fair. Nonetheless, some interesting bits and references along the lines of war / economy / speed / proletarian discussions, etc. … Virilio also comes to the same conclusion (Duchesne) that the history os the West is superior in terms of SPEED.”—
Correct. The better word is ‘maneuver’ but yes. Or as I say “adaptive velocity”. We are not first we are fastest.
-
Similar Ideas
Feb 9, 2020, 10:23 AM
—“Hi Curt, have you read, “Speed & Politics” by Paul Virilio?”—Jame B
No, because I find continental philosophical work sophomoric. But you will find the same argument in my work’s restructuring of economics as time, and therefore all we do is increase the rate of production in time through increasing division of labor and knowledge. So yes I say the same thing but as usual in anglo scientific rather than continental literary exposition.
—“Fair. Nonetheless, some interesting bits and references along the lines of war / economy / speed / proletarian discussions, etc. … Virilio also comes to the same conclusion (Duchesne) that the history os the West is superior in terms of SPEED.”—
Correct. The better word is ‘maneuver’ but yes. Or as I say “adaptive velocity”. We are not first we are fastest.
-
The Human Capacity to Create Categories
Feb 9, 2020, 11:20 AM Andrew M Gilmour Try this: The human capacity to create categories by abstraction begins with detachment from, and personification of, the inner (imaginary) and outer(existential) experiences(‘worlds’). Animists develop river spirits and thunder gods using this natural application of human cognitive ability. We also anthropomorphize [enumerate the inner states here] (inner states) that exist across all humans, including Venus[explain the state], Mars, Mercury, etc; love, war, communication etc. [Explain how all emotions are derived from three neurochemicals and our sexual hormones]. As cultures develop they stop projecting on and externalizing (though in some ways they are external) specific events and internal drives. The final step after integrating reason (Thoth, Oghma, etc) is to anthropomorphize the order behind all order; the integrated inner and outer worlds, monotheism. The personification of the order behind all order and chaos. The anthropomorphized personification of the totality of reality; causality itself.
-
The Human Capacity to Create Categories
Feb 9, 2020, 11:20 AM Andrew M Gilmour Try this: The human capacity to create categories by abstraction begins with detachment from, and personification of, the inner (imaginary) and outer(existential) experiences(‘worlds’). Animists develop river spirits and thunder gods using this natural application of human cognitive ability. We also anthropomorphize [enumerate the inner states here] (inner states) that exist across all humans, including Venus[explain the state], Mars, Mercury, etc; love, war, communication etc. [Explain how all emotions are derived from three neurochemicals and our sexual hormones]. As cultures develop they stop projecting on and externalizing (though in some ways they are external) specific events and internal drives. The final step after integrating reason (Thoth, Oghma, etc) is to anthropomorphize the order behind all order; the integrated inner and outer worlds, monotheism. The personification of the order behind all order and chaos. The anthropomorphized personification of the totality of reality; causality itself.
-
Re: Jordan Peterson’s Condition
Feb 9, 2020, 12:08 PM I’m equally vulnerable to these drugs which is why I don’t touch them. I’ve had four major surgery episodes in my life that required anesthesia, one for eleven hours. The withdrawal from the anesthesia is intolerable to the point at which you almost want to die in order for it to stop. I have inhuman willpower and pain tolerance and I can barely manage getting through it by just knowing that it will end in 90 days. So whenever I have surgery I don’t need pain killers at all. Pain doesn’t bother me. At all. Tylenol is the most I ever need. But I have to plan on being a totally unproductive unpredictable depressed stressed, nervous basket case for sixty days and taking 90 days to recover. Peterson can’t just walk way like I can. I have no problem letting everything go to hell for ninety days while I recover – no guilt at all. He can’t. Between his wife’s illness, his teaching load, his client load, the projects he has going on, book promotion, speaking engagements, and the degree of concentration one has to rely on in hostile interviews. I know this guy’s background pretty well. And sure, his popularity is economically rewarding, and it helps your status, but fundamentally this guy is a fellow borderline autist with the attendant limited social anxiety, and attendant introversion, elevated to a position of opportunity in which his inner personality is continuously under duress. People think that because we are autists we have fewer feelings, and that’s just not true – they are just disorganized chaos (noise) and overwhelming, so we ignore them the way you ignore white noise in the room. I don’t like Peterson’s devotion to abrahamism or that he’s still a shill for the mainstream. But he does try hard to put forward the cooperationist position that we are biologically and psychologically different and as a consequences, socially and politically different. And that’s his contribution. And we shouldn’t be pissed at the guy for not being the leader you want.
-
Re: Jordan Peterson’s Condition
Feb 9, 2020, 12:08 PM I’m equally vulnerable to these drugs which is why I don’t touch them. I’ve had four major surgery episodes in my life that required anesthesia, one for eleven hours. The withdrawal from the anesthesia is intolerable to the point at which you almost want to die in order for it to stop. I have inhuman willpower and pain tolerance and I can barely manage getting through it by just knowing that it will end in 90 days. So whenever I have surgery I don’t need pain killers at all. Pain doesn’t bother me. At all. Tylenol is the most I ever need. But I have to plan on being a totally unproductive unpredictable depressed stressed, nervous basket case for sixty days and taking 90 days to recover. Peterson can’t just walk way like I can. I have no problem letting everything go to hell for ninety days while I recover – no guilt at all. He can’t. Between his wife’s illness, his teaching load, his client load, the projects he has going on, book promotion, speaking engagements, and the degree of concentration one has to rely on in hostile interviews. I know this guy’s background pretty well. And sure, his popularity is economically rewarding, and it helps your status, but fundamentally this guy is a fellow borderline autist with the attendant limited social anxiety, and attendant introversion, elevated to a position of opportunity in which his inner personality is continuously under duress. People think that because we are autists we have fewer feelings, and that’s just not true – they are just disorganized chaos (noise) and overwhelming, so we ignore them the way you ignore white noise in the room. I don’t like Peterson’s devotion to abrahamism or that he’s still a shill for the mainstream. But he does try hard to put forward the cooperationist position that we are biologically and psychologically different and as a consequences, socially and politically different. And that’s his contribution. And we shouldn’t be pissed at the guy for not being the leader you want.
-
Where Did It Start?
Feb 9, 2020, 6:20 PM WHERE DID IT START?
—“What part of the world did the gene for “higher IQ” start, and why?”—
INTERESTING QUESTION 1) We seem to have been continuously evolving intelligence for a long time. It’s very difficult to make a case for intelligence developing in other than africa. It’s easy to make the case that between exiting africa and the present, selection pressure may have put serious upward pressure on groups in higher latitudes. But there isn’t any difference between a guy with a 140 iq from Ghana, a 140 iq from Beijing, a 140 IQ from Persia, and a 140 IQ from England that isn’t reducible to minor variations in the bias between verbal-experiential and spatial-mechanical abilities. 2) As far as I know, neoteny (reduction of rate and depth of sexual maturity) provides us with most of our gains in intelligence. 3) As far as I know the difference between the classes is genetic load (accumulated defects) in the lower classes. 4) As far as I know the primary difference between the races and sub races is the relative size of the lower classes, meaning that some groups are burdened with many more lower IQ people per high IQ person. This explains differences in averages. 5) As far as I know races, subraces, classes, and genders vary a bit by standard deviation in both intelligence, and personality traits, with both appearing to reflect degree of neoteny (asians most, then whites then mixes, then africans) 6) as far as I know there is no gene for higher IQ, so much as lower genetic load, larger brain volume, neurological density, and more time to mature. In other words, it works the other way around. 7) So you want a small lower class, the optimum degree of neoteny, a big brain with lots of neurons. Han Chinese (most Chinese are not Han) have large round heads, are highly neotenous to the point of producing negative side effects (higher emotional instability), and it seems that their intellectual peak is early. 8) The delta in intelligence between groups appears limited in the upper classes (at the same level of intelligence) but there appears to be different ability in the way intelligence is expressed between europeans, ashkenazi (half european jews), and east asians.