(Television is the curse of the American people….. Followed rapidly by the advertising it distributes.)
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-04 20:34:00 UTC
Theme: Deception
-
LEAVING A MARK ON REVOLUTIONARY HISTORY AS A DEFENSE FOR ALL TIME AGAINST THE IN
LEAVING A MARK ON REVOLUTIONARY HISTORY AS A DEFENSE FOR ALL TIME AGAINST THE INDUSTRIALIZATION OF LYING
by Ely Harman
—“Don’t forget the burning of actual people. That’s an important detail; lots and lots of people. And then the charred skulls will be piled into great pyramids and preserved as a warning to anyone who would be tempted to industrialize lying for 10,000 years.”— Ely Harman
(awesome)
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-04 10:25:00 UTC
-
Stay on Message: “I Deliver”. Add message “Why do Americans need media to tell t
Stay on Message: “I Deliver”. Add message “Why do Americans need media to tell them what to think?” #Trump @realDonaldTrump
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-03 18:42:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/881946185103273986
-
Stay on Message: “I Deliver”. Add message “Why do Americans need media to tell t
Stay on Message: “I Deliver”. Add message “Why do Americans need media to tell them what to think?” #Trump @realDonaldTrump
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-03 14:42:00 UTC
-
THE MIND OF A POSTMODERNIST – THE ART OF DECEIT. The reason I don’t ban Zachary
THE MIND OF A POSTMODERNIST – THE ART OF DECEIT.
The reason I don’t ban Zachary Davidson is because he is exceptional at the use of an extensive vocabulary for the purpose of obscuring his technique, which is the postmodern denial of truth.
Abrahamism is the most creative vector for lying ever created but the technique is quite simple: suggestion by straw men, ridicule, criticism, and overloading.
The fact that he uses the via negativa of skepticism suggesting that all truth is impossible, and therefore only scripture (authority) or preference (regardless of consequence) is just the inverse of the promise of salvation.
Just as marxism inverted the promise of life after death and a second coming. Just as postmodernism inverted the class warfare into an identity warfare.
So once you understand the technique it’s a bit like understanding literary analysis and losing your ability to enjoy fiction.
Or in most people’s cases, understanding science, and losing your ability to enjoy religion.
Or in my case, understanding the dimensions of reality and the various logics we have invented for testing each of them (and losing your ability to enjoy philosophy.
Postmodernism is just the most recent generation of the technique of lying we call Abrahamism.
Whereas Political Correctness is just outright denial and outright lying but repetitive chanting.
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-02 16:48:00 UTC
-
“WHAT YOU SAY, WHAT PEOPLE HEAR, WHAT YOU MEAN.” by Ben Smith 1) When you say th
“WHAT YOU SAY, WHAT PEOPLE HEAR, WHAT YOU MEAN.”
by Ben Smith
1) When you say this: “I’m all for highly redistributive nationalism.”
2) What people hear is this: “I want to take from the rich and give to the poor.”
3) What you mean is this: “I want to redistribute a lot, but there won’t be anything for free. Everything will be paid for, one way or another.”
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-02 13:27:00 UTC
-
WHY DO YOU RESIST TRUTHFULNESS IN THE COMMONS? In other words, why you want room
WHY DO YOU RESIST TRUTHFULNESS IN THE COMMONS?
In other words, why you want room to load frame, suggest, obscure, fictionalize and deceive? There is a difference between false, useful, preferable, good, and true. I only worry about false, criminal, unethical, and immoral. The market can choose whatever it wants as long as it is not false (including criminal, unethical, and immoral.) So literature and myth are different from fictionalism.
Fictionalism (religion, idealism, pseudoscience, deception) lies.
Myth and literature advise.
Science and law decide.
There is no place for justifying the conflation of the competition between advice and decidability into the monopoly authority and faith.
It’s just lying. Plain and simple.
And the consequences for jews, christians, and muslims have been tragic and the consequences for the world because of jews, christians, and muslims has been tragic.
So what excuse do you make for THE PRESERVATION OF EVIL?
Source date (UTC): 2017-07-02 12:02:00 UTC
-
= FAKE NEWS / PSEUDOSCIENCE Yeah. Well studied territory. Totally false. Reality
https://www.vox.com/conversations/2017/6/27/15873072/google-porn-addiction-america-everybody-lies?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=entry&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebookVOX = FAKE NEWS / PSEUDOSCIENCE
Yeah. Well studied territory. Totally false.
Reality? people search for novelty. So what we see at any given time is the market for novelty given the inventory of consumption of the individuals.
I investigated the homosexuality thing, and the findings will surprise you. (Fascinating)
it’s just possible to search for homosexual porn in some countries then use the search results to get access to regular porn through proxy servers.
Pakistan for example (as many muslim countries) most commonly searches for homosexual porn. But the reason is not intuitive. 😉
The measure of sexual interest is the individual porn sites and dating sites and this is pretty well understood territory, and every stereotype you can imagine turns out to be true.
Just another example of the fact that ‘stereotypes are the most accurate measure in the social sciences”.
So (a) as is usual, vox = fake news. (b) as usual, vox = pseudoscience.
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-30 14:02:00 UTC
-
“Doolittle seeks to avenge the Pied Piper’s enslavement of the town’s children,
—“Doolittle seeks to avenge the Pied Piper’s enslavement of the town’s children, to whom so many have been lost. And to do so by destroying, not the music itself, but the occupation of the exploiter of music: the Piper”—William L. Benge
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-30 09:54:00 UTC
-
I LOVE IT WHEN PEOPLE CHALLENGE ME IN MATH AND LOGIC USING SPECIAL PLEADING. 😉
I LOVE IT WHEN PEOPLE CHALLENGE ME IN MATH AND LOGIC USING SPECIAL PLEADING. 😉
—“We are talking about logic and mathematics; areas where American low quality of education and rhetoric is irrelevant.
All Statements are: (either True or False)
Whether a statement is undecidable in a system is irrelevant; it is still a statement and thus either T or F. End of story
No amount of poor education from you; knowing no significant logic or mathematics will change that.
As an aside if you foolishly imagine that all of math is either trivial or tautologous then why have you not presented your proofs of : Fermat’s last theorem, The Continuum Hypothesis, Goldbachs Result
I will tell you. It is because you do not even have a high school level of competence and your poor education is devoid of any significant logic and mathematics.”—- Robert Mosimann
CURT’S RESPONSE
That is very interesting because I have a far greater grasp of these things than you do, I am certain. Much of my work involves the falsification of the special pleading employed in mathematics and logic – and particularly the logic of ordinary language.
Is it true that all statements can be demonstrated to be true or false? No. Because a proposition or statement must be decidably true or decidably false, otherwise it is undecidable. And if you understood Kripke in philosophy, and Goedel in mathematics, and even Poincare, Hilbert, Brouwer in math, and Bridgman in physics (and even Mises in economics) then you would know that. And that’s before we bring in Turing.
Decidably true, and Decidably false both require our ability to decide
The trope: [everything in this box is false] is undecidable. It is not true. It is not false. It is undecidable.
So you might engage in special pleading (making excuses) which is common in philosophy, logic, and mathematics, but you cannot testify that an undecidable statement is false without employing special pleading and therefore falsifying your statement.
At best, you can say, “In logic we are concerned only with deductibility, and we can only deduce from true(not false, not undecidable) statements, and therefore out of convention we attribute to the statement itself, that which is a property of its use in deducibility (service as a premise).”
So just as we prohibit special pleading in theology, just as we eliminate special pleading in philosophy, if we eliminate special pleading in logic (the study of constant properties of categories and sets), an if we eliminate special pleading in mathematics (the study of constant relations between types), we are reduced to existential (testimonial or performative) truth as used in science (the study of the elimination of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit) by the construction of physical and logical methods of measurement that reduce the imperceptible and incomparable and undecidable to that which is perceivable, comparable, and decidable.”
4 – The Analytically True (Tautological).
3 – The (ideally) True (most parsimonious possible in human language)
2 – The truthful (that which we have performed due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit, by the tests of consistency in the categorical, logical, empirical, operational, rational-incentive, reciprocal-moral, and fully accounted.)
1 – The truth candidate (that which we have not yet found false but have not yet fully exposed to due diligence)
0 – The undecidable (that which we can say is neither true nor false nor possible)
-1 – The False candidate ( which which is possible in the process of failing due diligence)
-2 – The Falsified (that which has failed due diligence and cannot be otherwise than false.)
-3 – The (ideally) False (the most parsimonious possible in human language)
-4 – The Analytically False (Self Contradictory)
The question then, is why does one need to employ and defend special pleading other than to hide behind a veil of ignorance or deceit?
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukraine
Source date (UTC): 2017-06-29 14:16:00 UTC