Theme: Crisis

Define “catch on” 😉

The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes?
The minimum legislative or legal changes to allow us to hold public discourse on solving the crisis of the age?
The set of policies that will solve the crisis of the age, and prepare us for the future?
The cause of the crisis of the age as a natural consequence of this point in historical development – despite that it’s even more offensive to many than was darwin?
The changes to the constitution necessary to reform and prevent another repeat of the present?
The changes to the common law necessary to do so?
The science and logic of first principles of evolutionary computation as the paradigm and standard and weights of measures across all disciplines?
The grammars as a hierarchy of computable paradigms of increasing dimensions?
The P-Grammar of operational prose, testimony, and reciprocity?
The P-Method of disambiguation into ordinal measurements by enumeration, serialization, and operationalization.
The reformation of each of the disciplines to end incommensurability, paradigmatic isolation, and the pseudoscience and scientific failure that’s resulted?
The reformation of the behavioral sciences, in particular psychology and sociology, but also economics and politics?

How far down the rabbit hole do you want me to explain to people. This is more in line with the scope of work of aristotle (everything), or the empirical revolution, or the scientific revolution, but it’s the completion of the unification of the science by solving the behavioral sciences as thoroughly as we did the physical.

I mean. What do I need people to understand vs what do we need different groups of people to understand? 😉

If you look at that list, what do you think that 10% needs to understand. Because our experience is that the people who actually participate in political matters consists of a fraction who are almost always trying to solve point problems and are ignorant of the broader context.

So yes, advice is appreciated. 😉

Reply addressees: @dannysmanifesto

Define “catch on” 😉

The need for ‘activism’ to bring about these changes?
The minimum legislative or legal changes to allow us to hold public discourse on solving the crisis of the age?
The set of policies that will solve the crisis of the age, and prepare us for the future?
The cause of the crisis of the age as a natural consequence of this point in historical development – despite that it’s even more offensive to many than was darwin?
The changes to the constitution necessary to reform and prevent another repeat of the present?
The changes to the common law necessary to do so?
The science and logic of first principles of evolutionary computation as the paradigm and standard and weights of measures across all disciplines?
The grammars as a hierarchy of computable paradigms of increasing dimensions?
The P-Grammar of operational prose, testimony, and reciprocity?
The P-Method of disambiguation into ordinal measurements by enumeration, serialization, and operationalization.
The reformation of each of the disciplines to end incommensurability, paradigmatic isolation, and the pseudoscience and scientific failure that’s resulted?
The reformation of the behavioral sciences, in particular psychology and sociology, but also economics and politics?

How far down the rabbit hole do you want me to explain to people. This is more in line with the scope of work of aristotle (everything), or the empirical revolution, or the scientific revolution, but it’s the completion of the unification of the science by solving the behavioral sciences as thoroughly as we did the physical.

I mean. What do I need people to understand vs what do we need different groups of people to understand? 😉

If you look at that list, what do you think that 10% needs to understand. Because our experience is that the people who actually participate in political matters consists of a fraction who are almost always trying to solve point problems and are ignorant of the broader context.

So yes, advice is appreciated. 😉