Yes. Probably should use “~Truth” > testimony > decidability
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-04 19:38:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643337378948317184
Reply addressees: @TheAutistocrat
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643336420071813126
CHOICE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decidability(after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Testimony (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Truth (before)
COGNITION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Grammars (after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Language (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Logical Laws (before)
ACTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proportionality (after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reciprocity (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Self Determination (before)
LIMITS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Behavioral Laws (actions, during)
Physical laws (states, Before) . . . . . . . .Evolutionary laws (consequences, after)
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-04 18:04:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643313488926744580
CHOICE
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Decidability(after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Testimony (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Truth (before)
COGNITION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . The Grammars (after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Language (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Logical Laws (before)
ACTION
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Proportionality (after)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Reciprocity (during)
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Self Determination (before)
LIMITS
. . . . . . . . . . . . . . Behavioral Laws (actions, during)
Physical laws (states, Before) . . . . . . . .Evolutionary laws (consequences, after)
Source date (UTC): 2023-04-04 18:04:01 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1643313488813498376
FASCINATING: GPT SUMMARIZES MY WORK ON TRUTH DIFFERENTLY.
(This response isn’t quite right, because it conflates the truth hierarchy with the dimensions of testing the truth of a statement. And is missing elements of both the definition and the test. So it’s ‘summarizing’ about like a high school or college student might – when in fact it’s engaging in an error of conflation. But you’ve got to admit it ‘understands’ better than 99% of the people who read my work. 😉 )
–“Philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle defines truth as a spectrum from honesty to tautology. Can you list the types of truth he defines in that spectrum?”–
Yes, Curt Doolittle’s theory of truth includes a spectrum that ranges from honesty to tautology. Along this spectrum, he identifies several different types of truth:
Honesty: According to Doolittle, honesty is the most basic form of truth, and it involves accurately reporting what one has observed or experienced. Honesty is essential for building trust and cooperation in social groups.
Correspondence: Correspondence truth is the degree to which a statement or belief accurately corresponds to reality. This type of truth is based on empirical evidence and is essential for making accurate predictions about the world.
Operational: Operational truth is the degree to which a statement or belief can be verified or falsified through physical operations or tests. This type of truth is closely related to the concept of decidability, which involves the ability to determine whether a statement or belief is true or false through a physical operation or test.
Coherence: Coherence truth is the degree to which a set of beliefs or statements fit together in a coherent and logical way. This type of truth is important for constructing internally consistent and logically valid systems of thought.
Existential: Existential truth is the degree to which a statement or belief reflects the fundamental nature of existence. This type of truth is closely related to metaphysical and ontological questions, and it is often debated in philosophical and religious contexts.
Tautological: Tautological truth is the degree to which a statement or belief is true by definition or by virtue of the meaning of its terms. This type of truth is often criticized for being circular or uninformative, as it does not provide any new information beyond what is already contained in the statement or belief.
Overall, Doolittle’s spectrum of truth highlights the different ways in which truth can be defined and understood, ranging from basic honesty to more complex concepts related to correspondence, coherence, and existential questions.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-31 14:47:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641814591138045952
FASCINATING: GPT SUMMARIZES MY WORK ON TRUTH DIFFERENTLY.
(This response isn’t quite right, because it conflates the truth hierarchy with the dimensions of testing the truth of a statement. And is missing elements of both the definition and the test. So it’s ‘summarizing’ about like a high school or college student might – when in fact it’s engaging in an error of conflation. But you’ve got to admit it ‘understands’ better than 99% of the people who read my work. 😉 )
–“Philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle defines truth as a spectrum from honesty to tautology. Can you list the types of truth he defines in that spectrum?”–
Yes, Curt Doolittle’s theory of truth includes a spectrum that ranges from honesty to tautology. Along this spectrum, he identifies several different types of truth:
Honesty: According to Doolittle, honesty is the most basic form of truth, and it involves accurately reporting what one has observed or experienced. Honesty is essential for building trust and cooperation in social groups.
Correspondence: Correspondence truth is the degree to which a statement or belief accurately corresponds to reality. This type of truth is based on empirical evidence and is essential for making accurate predictions about the world.
Operational: Operational truth is the degree to which a statement or belief can be verified or falsified through physical operations or tests. This type of truth is closely related to the concept of decidability, which involves the ability to determine whether a statement or belief is true or false through a physical operation or test.
Coherence: Coherence truth is the degree to which a set of beliefs or statements fit together in a coherent and logical way. This type of truth is important for constructing internally consistent and logically valid systems of thought.
Existential: Existential truth is the degree to which a statement or belief reflects the fundamental nature of existence. This type of truth is closely related to metaphysical and ontological questions, and it is often debated in philosophical and religious contexts.
Tautological: Tautological truth is the degree to which a statement or belief is true by definition or by virtue of the meaning of its terms. This type of truth is often criticized for being circular or uninformative, as it does not provide any new information beyond what is already contained in the statement or belief.
Overall, Doolittle’s spectrum of truth highlights the different ways in which truth can be defined and understood, ranging from basic honesty to more complex concepts related to correspondence, coherence, and existential questions.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-31 14:47:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641814590915739650
SERIOUSLY GPT4 CAN EXPLAIN MY WORK… AND IT”S CORRECT. … FASCINATING
–“How does philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle define decidabilty?”–
Curt Doolittle, the philosopher and social scientist who developed the theory of Propertarianism, uses the concept of “operationalism” to define decidability. According to Doolittle, operationalism is the principle that concepts and propositions should be defined in terms of the physical operations that can be used to verify or falsify them.
In this context, decidability can be understood as the ability to determine whether a proposition or statement is true or false through a physical operation or test. Doolittle emphasizes that operational definitions are essential for achieving clarity and rigor in scientific and philosophical discourse, and that they allow for the development of empirical and testable theories.
In the context of Propertarianism, decidability is closely related to the concept of “testimonialism,” which is the idea that knowledge can be obtained through testimony and can be verified through empirical tests. Doolittle argues that the ability to verify claims through empirical tests is essential for achieving objective knowledge and for overcoming biases and errors in human reasoning.
Overall, Doolittle’s theory of operationalism and testimonialism provides a framework for defining decidability in terms of physical operations and empirical tests, which can be used to verify or falsify claims about the world.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-31 14:40:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641812809624240129
SERIOUSLY GPT4 CAN EXPLAIN MY WORK… AND IT”S CORRECT. … FASCINATING
–“How does philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle define decidabilty?”–
Curt Doolittle, the philosopher and social scientist who developed the theory of Propertarianism, uses the concept of “operationalism” to define decidability. According to Doolittle, operationalism is the principle that concepts and propositions should be defined in terms of the physical operations that can be used to verify or falsify them.
In this context, decidability can be understood as the ability to determine whether a proposition or statement is true or false through a physical operation or test. Doolittle emphasizes that operational definitions are essential for achieving clarity and rigor in scientific and philosophical discourse, and that they allow for the development of empirical and testable theories.
In the context of Propertarianism, decidability is closely related to the concept of “testimonialism,” which is the idea that knowledge can be obtained through testimony and can be verified through empirical tests. Doolittle argues that the ability to verify claims through empirical tests is essential for achieving objective knowledge and for overcoming biases and errors in human reasoning.
Overall, Doolittle’s theory of operationalism and testimonialism provides a framework for defining decidability in terms of physical operations and empirical tests, which can be used to verify or falsify claims about the world.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-31 14:40:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1641812809490083842
(Advanced topic warning)
a) a dimension refers to a measurement necessary to disambiguate a reference. Or more specifically, in mathematics, to produce a set of vectors that produce a direction of causality that will influence other dimensions of causality. Ergo why we use Manifolds in mathematics to track dense causalities (relations). Our neurons are for all intents and purpose producing vast networks of cause in the manifold that is our neocortex.
b) The universe only requires three spatial and one time dimensions to describe it. We can use either three linear or two circular(direction) and one linear (scale) dimensions as descriptors.
c) (Very advanced topic) The universe is incapable of more than those three plus one dimensions – no more dimensions are possible without destroying the prior four.
d) When we talk of say ten dimensions we are talking about a three step hierarchy of dimensions of causality, each that affects the others within the one time dimensions. In physics this means it is likely that there is at least one more dimension of causality (one more hierarchy of constant states) beneath the quantum background.
e) Until we end our wasted einsteinian century ‘lost in mathiness’ (pseudoscience), by completing the classical model of the quantum background (we’re close), explaining what we call particles but aren’t (they’re closer to lightning storms that collapse as lightning bolts), and explain the cause of the quantum background we will not know if the speed of light and the mass that results as we compress the quantum background, can be overcome. I have, no one has, any sense as yet whether it’s possible. If not, and, if we cannot capture and use the energy of the quantum background (huge) even if only zero point, then we are ‘not going anywhere fast’.
f) As such the only dimension we can likely ‘colonize’ is time. And in that sense, given relative time at mass and velocity (or even independent thereof) for all intents and purposes ‘dimensions’ (differeent rates of life histories) will be effectively infinite.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 22:00:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639386608200818693
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639333629477416961
(Advanced topic warning)
a) a dimension refers to a measurement necessary to disambiguate a reference. Or more specifically, in mathematics, to produce a set of vectors that produce a direction of causality that will influence other dimensions of causality. Ergo why we use Manifolds in mathematics to track dense causalities (relations). Our neurons are for all intents and purpose producing vast networks of cause in the manifold that is our neocortex.
b) The universe only requires three spatial and one time dimensions to describe it. We can use either three linear or two circular(direction) and one linear (scale) dimensions as descriptors.
c) (Very advanced topic) The universe is incapable of more than those three plus one dimensions – no more dimensions are possible without destroying the prior four.
d) When we talk of say ten dimensions we are talking about a three step hierarchy of dimensions of causality, each that affects the others within the one time dimensions. In physics this means it is likely that there is at least one more dimension of causality (one more hierarchy of constant states) beneath the quantum background.
e) Until we end our wasted einsteinian century ‘lost in mathiness’ (pseudoscience), by completing the classical model of the quantum background (we’re close), explaining what we call particles but aren’t (they’re closer to lightning storms that collapse as lightning bolts), and explain the cause of the quantum background we will not know if the speed of light and the mass that results as we compress the quantum background, can be overcome. I have, no one has, any sense as yet whether it’s possible. If not, and, if we cannot capture and use the energy of the quantum background (huge) even if only zero point, then we are ‘not going anywhere fast’.
f) As such the only dimension we can likely ‘colonize’ is time. And in that sense, given relative time at mass and velocity (or even independent thereof) for all intents and purposes ‘dimensions’ (differeent rates of life histories) will be effectively infinite.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Reply addressees: @whatifalthist
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 22:00:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639386608016187393
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639333629477416961
THE RULES OF DECIDABILITY IN INTERNATIONAL NATURAL LAW
1) RECIPROCITY in self-determination by self determined means is the natural law of non-conflict (cooperation).
2) IMPROVEMENT by capital investment, by the people in the territory, by domestication, infrastructure, institutions, and monuments, determines who has ‘rights’ (priority) to the territory.
3) The superiority of SMALL HOMOGENOUS ethnocentric states, because of the trust, velocity of cooperation, low power distance, and absence of conflict, that in turn promotes investment in commons that in turn reduce the cost for all, limiting the need for individual and family income.
4) The superiority of RULE OF LAW BY THE NATURAL LAW, the sovereignty of that natural law, and an independent court, regardless of the form of government that operates under that law, from monarchy, to ideology, to bureaucracy, to republic to democracy. Natural Law matters not government. It suppresses private and public corruption by creating a market for prosecution of irreciprocity.
4) Only FEDERATIONS – and not empires – can produce defense for small homogenous states, and maintain natural (necessary) rights. All existing hostilities are attempts to override the natural law of self determination by self determined means – mostly be the remaining agrarian empires that have failed to transition to rule of law: at least Russia, Iran, and China. Or those states with artificial borders created during colonial period, that haven’t yet converted (peacefully) to ethnostates.
5) GOVERNMENTS HAVE NO RIGHTS and cannot have rights, only people can. Governments can only act to produce and preserve natural rights – else they are not governments but organized crime.
6) The NATURAL PROGRESSION OF MAN, as with all life, is toward a large number of small homogeneous ethnocentric states, operating under natural law, creating a market for polities to accomodate our differences, and trading meritocratically with one another, all defended by federations, producing a market for innovation adaptation and evolution, that peacefully and prosperously transcends man into the gods we imagine we might yet be – and perhaps better than those we have yet imagined.
-FIN-
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-24 21:15:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1639375521388589057