Theme: Causality

  • Metaphysics must means paradigm and paradigm just means a set of constant relati

    Metaphysics must means paradigm and paradigm just means a set of constant relations, but whether those constant relations correspond to reality, your imagination, your imagination of what you might do, is either demonstrable or not. It doesn’t matter when it’s just in your head.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-04 00:48:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179921280352563202

    Reply addressees: @freedomismoral

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179920475046268928


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @freedomismoral Well courts do so every day in governance of human actions. You cannot make a truth claim about that which you cannot Testify. It’s simply not possible. You can find meaning, utility, satisfaction, sedation, you can find faith, but without demonstration you don’t know either.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179920475046268928


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @freedomismoral Well courts do so every day in governance of human actions. You cannot make a truth claim about that which you cannot Testify. It’s simply not possible. You can find meaning, utility, satisfaction, sedation, you can find faith, but without demonstration you don’t know either.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179920475046268928

  • Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time.

    SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME. (a) mutation rate != yardage (or any other linear measure) (b) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. (20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory That number increases by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed) or regulatory. We don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference it does not tell us difference in genetic expression. (c) some are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races) (d) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound. (e) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So; (f) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations. (g) we make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes. (h) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by: – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics: There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period. YOU CAN’T AVERAGE AN AVERAGE, and STATISTICS MUST BE OPERATIONALLY EXPLICABLE OR THEY’RE MEANINGLESS. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations) You have to explain both to make a truth claim.

  • Rate of Mutation Tells Us Little Other than Time.

    SORRY ALL BUT, NO. RATE OF MUTATION TELLS US LITTLE OTHER THAN TIME. (a) mutation rate != yardage (or any other linear measure) (b) some mutations (cortical scale) are profoundly differentiating – just one gene. (20% of neurons in the cortex are regulatory That number increases by region. The same is true for genes. It certainly appears that the vast majority are either dead (not expressed) or regulatory. We don’t know what percent are expressed. So all mutation rate tells us is time difference it does not tell us difference in genetic expression. (c) some are profoundly consequential (delay in maturity : neoteny – just hormonal development is largely what varies between human races) (d) Genes do not produce linear effects (machine parts) but are causally dense (program code) with anything from zero consequence (noise, or regulatory), some of tiny consequence (rates of expression), and some profound. (e) One Single Additional Protein (molecular machine) may cause billions of consequences. So; (f) Of our evolutionary history, regardless of the RATE of migration, it could be only .001% of those mutations that cause 99.999% of competitive evolutionary variations. (g) we make a big deal out of 3% difference from chimpanzees but we have no idea the scale of difference provided by each of those variations. intelligence appears to be affected by hundreds if not thousands (a concert problem). Neoteny appears not to be (a small number of hormonal channels). Yet together the effect of these two sets is profound with just small changes. (h) As far as I know almost all evolutionary change is driven by: – demand for success in the local environment (ie: black resistance to malaria). – failure in the local environment (loss of height in southeast islands, loss of fire making, tool making, by austronesians.) – utility (white consumption of milk adding 40% more calories to the diet) – social animal sortition (variations in demand for competitive traits) – age of the carriers (rate of mutation or degradation) – errors in replication (genes – which happen all the time – cancer etc ) – conflicts in integration (male and female genes) – random mutations. – combinations of all of the above. On statistics: There isn’t much evidence that we are capable of using statistics on any causally dense phenomenon with any greater precision than a single regression. Period. YOU CAN’T AVERAGE AN AVERAGE, and STATISTICS MUST BE OPERATIONALLY EXPLICABLE OR THEY’RE MEANINGLESS. (correlation is not causation, and operations produce correlations) You have to explain both to make a truth claim.

  • No. Don’t Conflate Arousal and Consciousness

    Gak. No. Confusing Arousal with Consciousness is like confusing the light switch with the light. Just ’cause we can turn off the switch doesn’t tell us how the light is created. We can interfere with any number of parts (Colostrum) and shut down experience. That doesn’t tell us anything. The question is, how does that mushy wetware synthesize past memory present experience, and future prediction, from millions of nerves (measurements) into our rather amazing conflated experiences of past, present and future? (cortical hierarchy, parahippocampal, perirhinal, entorhinal cortices and subiculum.) How do we shift between narrow focus, near perception, environmental perception, self perception, and deep introspection and imagination? (thalamus) Why is it we can react so quickly that we can hit a curve ball with a bat? (basal ganglia, cerebellum, and cortical prediction) How do we Assemble memories and experience them? (Hippocampus) What is that feeling of me? (mostly, hippocampus) Why can’t we pin it down. “Cause it’s a verb not a noun”. The continuous change in state in a hierarchy of ever smaller cycles of time….

  • PILPUL AND DERIVATIVES ARE FRAMED AS, BUT NOT CONTINGENT OR CAUSAL. —“A though

    PILPUL AND DERIVATIVES ARE FRAMED AS, BUT NOT CONTINGENT OR CAUSAL.

    —“A thought on grammars of ambiguation – pilpul and derivative ideologies base on primacy of linguistics would be… https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=476931476237081&id=100017606988153


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 23:29:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179538829822353409

  • PILPUL AND DERIVATIVES ARE FRAMED AS, BUT NOT CONTINGENT OR CAUSAL. —“A though

    PILPUL AND DERIVATIVES ARE FRAMED AS, BUT NOT CONTINGENT OR CAUSAL.

    —“A thought on grammars of ambiguation – pilpul and derivative ideologies base on primacy of linguistics would be grammars that are neither contingent nor causal, but are framed to be so?”—Bill Joslin

    Smart. Correct.

    — REGARDING —

    —“So it’s correct to call apriorism an ideal grammar, but not a formal grammar. Thankfully I finally know how to talk about the grammars of each incremental dimension… sigh. Mathematical grammars are not contingent because of constant relations. That’s their beauty. The problem is they’re non causal.Linguistic (Philosophical) grammars are contingent. That’s their weakness.Operational grammars are not contingent. And they’re causal. That’s their beauty.”—Curt Doolittle


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 19:28:00 UTC

  • Well, since we produce hypotheses by free association with what we would conside

    Well, since we produce hypotheses by free association with what we would consider practically infinite causal dimensions it’s partly true. But (a) we can reverse engineer them afterward, and (b) there appears a measurable ‘distance’ of prediction we can begin to identify.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 03:40:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179239804204126210

    Reply addressees: @mizroba @LTF_01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179237951450030081


    IN REPLY TO:

    @mizroba

    @LTF_01 @curtdoolittle https://t.co/AXN51XB7Jh

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179237951450030081

  • Scientific statements are two sided: the story we use to find opportunities and

    Scientific statements are two sided: the story we use to find opportunities and the processes we use to take advantage of the opportunities. The stories of any non trivial opportunity, and its processes will constantly evolve more parsimony: So the stories are myths: Partly true.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-02 03:12:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179232771023212544

    Reply addressees: @LTF_01

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179231269282029568


    IN REPLY TO:

    @LTF_01

    Believe it or not, almost all of science is myth-making. https://t.co/yLI6cqAj4k

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179231269282029568

  • But all products of the nervous system are the result of winning a competition f

    But all products of the nervous system are the result of winning a competition for attention. And there is only so much resistance that these networks can put up with before hyperbolic fears bleed through into rational thought. (women more so than men).


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-01 19:21:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179114131691053059

    Reply addressees: @ClownBa73413423

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1179113830456205313


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @ClownBa73413423 I think we should study the brain a bit more – all of us, because it’s computationally difficult to resist primal impulses when excited by stress. This lovely bundle of nerves across the top of the limbic system, serves largely to inhibit impulsive reactions to types of pain.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179113830456205313


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @ClownBa73413423 I think we should study the brain a bit more – all of us, because it’s computationally difficult to resist primal impulses when excited by stress. This lovely bundle of nerves across the top of the limbic system, serves largely to inhibit impulsive reactions to types of pain.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1179113830456205313

  • 5. That recursively process a moment of information and merge it with the next m

    5. That recursively process a moment of information and merge it with the next moment of information in a continuous stream which we can ‘buffer’ with a half life of just a few seconds, and no more than twenty or so. By Comparison of these moments we discern change in state.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-28 11:57:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1177915343982989313

    Reply addressees: @Nationalist7346

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1177914854096723968


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @Nationalist7346 4. Most of the advanced functions of the brain consist of these three ‘levers’ and the natural increase in reflection created by increasing brain size, from back (senses) to front (permuting, planning, manipulating). So the brain functions as a series of loops (operating system)

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1177914854096723968


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @Nationalist7346 4. Most of the advanced functions of the brain consist of these three ‘levers’ and the natural increase in reflection created by increasing brain size, from back (senses) to front (permuting, planning, manipulating). So the brain functions as a series of loops (operating system)

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1177914854096723968