Theme: Decidability

  • (Statements, propositions, and arguments are either false, sufficiently true, or

    (Statements, propositions, and arguments are either false, sufficiently true, or undecidable. Motives only assist us in identifying the cause of falsehood and deceit. Equating motive, or agreeableness with falsehood is one of the most common of postwar public deceits.)

    Reply addressees: @MinorityOfOne75 @IonaItalia @charlesmurray

  • (Statements, propositions, and arguments are either false, sufficiently true, or

    (Statements, propositions, and arguments are either false, sufficiently true, or undecidable. Motives only assist us in identifying the cause of falsehood and deceit. Equating motive, or agreeableness with falsehood is one of the most common of postwar public deceits.)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-08-15 21:53:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294754072856342533

    Reply addressees: @MinorityOfOne75 @IonaItalia @charlesmurray

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1294092713130942465

  • So some people ‘get it’ rather quickly, and others it takes some time. but those

    So some people ‘get it’ rather quickly, and others it takes some time. but those are the formal logical foundations of the work we call Propertarianism (P-Logic, P-Law).

    And it would terrify you or amaze you what it teaches you about the human capacity to lie – and want to.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-30 01:20:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288645721793716225

    Reply addressees: @bishkebab3

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288641495029780480

  • So some people ‘get it’ rather quickly, and others it takes some time. but those

    So some people ‘get it’ rather quickly, and others it takes some time. but those are the formal logical foundations of the work we call Propertarianism (P-Logic, P-Law).

    And it would terrify you or amaze you what it teaches you about the human capacity to lie – and want to.

    Reply addressees: @bishkebab3

  • Everyone in the future will practice some version of P-logic and law becuase it

    Everyone in the future will practice some version of P-logic and law becuase it solves the problem of extending the formal (logical), and physical (material) sciences into the human (metaphysics, language, psychology, sociology, ethics, politics, and law) as a single logic.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-29 17:34:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288528433455206402

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1288528129284349953


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    But it’s one thing to explain logic, programming, calculus, relativity, or quantum mechanics and to PRACTICE it as a means of reasoning so that you UNDERSTAND IT. P-law consists of a profound innovation merging cognitive science, programmatic logic,accounting, economics, and law.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1288528129284349953

  • Everyone in the future will practice some version of P-logic and law becuase it

    Everyone in the future will practice some version of P-logic and law becuase it solves the problem of extending the formal (logical), and physical (material) sciences into the human (metaphysics, language, psychology, sociology, ethics, politics, and law) as a single logic.

  • It doesn’t provide a means of determining what is not aggressable, and it tolera

    It doesn’t provide a means of determining what is not aggressable, and it tolerates blackmail for example (see my debate with walter block)


    Source date (UTC): 2020-07-28 02:59:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1287945644599054336

    Reply addressees: @joanlarma @JadeBai85455803 @billtalts @JulieBorowski

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1287943094999166976

  • It doesn’t provide a means of determining what is not aggressable, and it tolera

    It doesn’t provide a means of determining what is not aggressable, and it tolerates blackmail for example (see my debate with walter block)

    Reply addressees: @joanlarma @JadeBai85455803 @billtalts @JulieBorowski

  • Producing Measurements by Triangulation

    Producing Measurements by Triangulation

    Triangulation. It’s the same process as disambiguation by Serialization and operationalization. Use of adversarial competition to rank by one or more dimensions. Art is the best example of something we presume can’t be objectively measured. But we can judge almost anything by the accumulated excellence of human actions: caloric content (more dependencies is better). Take an art movement. Take the examples of that movement. analyze and rank by craftsmanship(construction, technique, materials), design(aesthetics, composition, light, color, texture, ), meaning (content, simple content to high content). Compare the ultimate achievements of that movement with those that were less so. Order them – this is triangulation. “Where does this fit between what other two?” You will notice that the progression is not linear but logarithmic, with many adequate pieces and few superior. You now have an ordinal if logarithmically scaling measure if not a cardinal and linear measure. Keep adding artworks until because of marginal indifference, you must categorize groups instead of stacking individual pieces. Now those categories produce a cardinal measure. Repeat for all art movements. Then stack those movements. You now have a metric for judging pieces (three dimensions), categories (one or three dimensions), and movements (one or three dimensions). Art is the hardest thing I know of, but the triangulation is how the brain works internally, so … well, there you go.  

    116345964_337645997633560_6430409338022713108_n.jpg
  • Producing Measurements by Triangulation

    Producing Measurements by Triangulation

    Triangulation. It’s the same process as disambiguation by Serialization and operationalization. Use of adversarial competition to rank by one or more dimensions. Art is the best example of something we presume can’t be objectively measured. But we can judge almost anything by the accumulated excellence of human actions: caloric content (more dependencies is better). Take an art movement. Take the examples of that movement. analyze and rank by craftsmanship(construction, technique, materials), design(aesthetics, composition, light, color, texture, ), meaning (content, simple content to high content). Compare the ultimate achievements of that movement with those that were less so. Order them – this is triangulation. “Where does this fit between what other two?” You will notice that the progression is not linear but logarithmic, with many adequate pieces and few superior. You now have an ordinal if logarithmically scaling measure if not a cardinal and linear measure. Keep adding artworks until because of marginal indifference, you must categorize groups instead of stacking individual pieces. Now those categories produce a cardinal measure. Repeat for all art movements. Then stack those movements. You now have a metric for judging pieces (three dimensions), categories (one or three dimensions), and movements (one or three dimensions). Art is the hardest thing I know of, but the triangulation is how the brain works internally, so … well, there you go.  

    116345964_337645997633560_6430409338022713108_n.jpg