Theme: Decidability

  • Can’t fault you. You’re operating from a presumption that’s the least bad until

    Can’t fault you. You’re operating from a presumption that’s the least bad until recently. P-Law is complete. Fully decidable formal, operational logic of langauge, psychology, sociology, ethics, law, politics, group strategy, and aesthetics.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-11-01 18:52:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322974911204347907

    Reply addressees: @mailmanposts

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322972478583369728

  • Is/ought = marginal indifference (chocolate/vanilla) Success/Failure = Marginal

    Is/ought = marginal indifference (chocolate/vanilla)
    Success/Failure = Marginal Difference
    not-error/error = Marginal Difference
    True/False = Decidability in context

    What is the personal, social, political, evolutionary cost of sedation by delusion?

    Dark Ages. That’s what.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-31 17:48:28 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322596311930195972

    Reply addressees: @cbstrohl

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1322590915593228290

  • No you prefer not to learn the definition of a process as I defined it. 🙂 It’s

    No you prefer not to learn the definition of a process as I defined it. 🙂 It’s ok. I assume that with the number of times I’ve repeated it, and the distillation that I’ve copied to the site as a post, that you are either incapable of understanding, signaling, or petulant. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-29 20:20:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321909723436929024

    Reply addressees: @PotsPol @Nationalist7346 @WorMartiN @RonNoble7 @ThruTheHayes

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321909222188175369

  • If a question is in fact decidable, and you refuse the method of decidability, t

    If a question is in fact decidable, and you refuse the method of decidability, the question is left to why. We know the reason in this case like we know all others, by the search for motive. The means is sophistry, but what’s your motive? I don’t know. I don’t care. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-29 20:18:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321909225417748480

    Reply addressees: @PotsPol @Nationalist7346 @WorMartiN @RonNoble7 @ThruTheHayes

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321906888397721602

  • So, this is why ‘economic thinking’ instead of ideal types, and ‘computational t

    So, this is why ‘economic thinking’ instead of ideal types, and ‘computational thinking’ instead of sets of ideal types, and definitions of spectra (serial types or just types) are to 20th century thought like empiricism was to theology. We just haven’t reformed education yet.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-29 19:50:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321902139803914240

    Reply addressees: @PotsPol @Nationalist7346 @WorMartiN @RonNoble7 @ThruTheHayes

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321899710546890752

  • The Institute’s Proposed Constitutional Reforms

    1) Decidability is determined by limits, and limits by first causes: the Logical, Physical, Natural, and Evolutionary Laws. Europeans and only Europeans discovered, adapted to, and applied those laws. The enlightenment continentals violated them with Jews the most recent violator.

    2) Where the anglos sought a seat at the table, the French killed the middle class, then killed the aristocracy, then merged church and state, and retained the anti-empirical strategy of the church.The Germans (the moral people) created rationalism as secular replacement theology.

    3) The Jews sought to maintain separatism, to maintain strategy of unity through undermining hosts, with false promise of utopias – transforming selling their ‘big lies’ of the supernatural ancient world, with ‘big lies’ of the pseudoscientific modern world as method of sedition.

    4) The Germanic Europeans were the only people to tolerate the truth of the logical, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws – sedating themselves with exhaustive Christian forgiveness of one another. The anglos the only to survive the Napoleonic destruction of Germanic Civ.

    5) Leaving the British as the only people dependent upon our ancestral natural common law, of self-determination by sovereignty, reciprocity in display word and deed, and duty to the commons. And the Americans to make the first attempt at a formal constitution of our natural law.

    6) My organization and I have completed the efforts of Germanic peoples, the English, and the founders, by producing a constitution of the european people that presumes nothing and declares everything so that the law isn’t open to abuse by “interpretation” (juridical fraud).

    7) In addition we have restored tort(crime) to words, and extended tort to cover false promise, baiting into hazard. (You won’t understand from these tweets). But we have created a constitution of “NO MORE LIES” and deprived the Jews of their ancient technique of war from within.

    8) In doing so we hope to not only reverse the century and a half of Jewish pseudoscience, sophism, and fraud; restore testimony as the default mode of public speech and public thought; and to prevent a repetition of the Jewish dark ages, and this dark age they have begun again.

    9) And we can do so without previous ‘prosecutions’ of the jews. and the good will reform and stay, and the bad will not reform and depart. (Despite our people’s want of restitution and punishment for their two thousand years of organized crime, and the 1b dead they caused.)

    10) Tort – the natural law of the universe, discovered adapted to and applied by western civilization – does not require intent – it requires failure of due diligence. Our reforms provide a method for testing the due diligence of claims against irreciprocity.

  • The Institute’s Proposed Constitutional Reforms

    1) Decidability is determined by limits, and limits by first causes: the Logical, Physical, Natural, and Evolutionary Laws. Europeans and only Europeans discovered, adapted to, and applied those laws. The enlightenment continentals violated them with Jews the most recent violator.

    2) Where the anglos sought a seat at the table, the French killed the middle class, then killed the aristocracy, then merged church and state, and retained the anti-empirical strategy of the church.The Germans (the moral people) created rationalism as secular replacement theology.

    3) The Jews sought to maintain separatism, to maintain strategy of unity through undermining hosts, with false promise of utopias – transforming selling their ‘big lies’ of the supernatural ancient world, with ‘big lies’ of the pseudoscientific modern world as method of sedition.

    4) The Germanic Europeans were the only people to tolerate the truth of the logical, physical, natural, and evolutionary laws – sedating themselves with exhaustive Christian forgiveness of one another. The anglos the only to survive the Napoleonic destruction of Germanic Civ.

    5) Leaving the British as the only people dependent upon our ancestral natural common law, of self-determination by sovereignty, reciprocity in display word and deed, and duty to the commons. And the Americans to make the first attempt at a formal constitution of our natural law.

    6) My organization and I have completed the efforts of Germanic peoples, the English, and the founders, by producing a constitution of the european people that presumes nothing and declares everything so that the law isn’t open to abuse by “interpretation” (juridical fraud).

    7) In addition we have restored tort(crime) to words, and extended tort to cover false promise, baiting into hazard. (You won’t understand from these tweets). But we have created a constitution of “NO MORE LIES” and deprived the Jews of their ancient technique of war from within.

    8) In doing so we hope to not only reverse the century and a half of Jewish pseudoscience, sophism, and fraud; restore testimony as the default mode of public speech and public thought; and to prevent a repetition of the Jewish dark ages, and this dark age they have begun again.

    9) And we can do so without previous ‘prosecutions’ of the jews. and the good will reform and stay, and the bad will not reform and depart. (Despite our people’s want of restitution and punishment for their two thousand years of organized crime, and the 1b dead they caused.)

    10) Tort – the natural law of the universe, discovered adapted to and applied by western civilization – does not require intent – it requires failure of due diligence. Our reforms provide a method for testing the due diligence of claims against irreciprocity.

  • 1 Decidability is determined by limits, and limits by first causes: the Logical,

    1 Decidability is determined by limits, and limits by first causes: the Logical, Physical, Natural, and Evolutionary Laws. Europeans and only Europeans discovered, adapted to, and applied those laws.The enlightenment continentals
    violated them with Jews the most recent violator.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-27 15:05:01 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1321105628694196232

  • 4) But a law of zero tolerance requires a system measurement (decidability) suff

    4) But a law of zero tolerance requires a system measurement (decidability) sufficient for zero tolerance. Not only in materials and deeds, but in words, and display. Not only in crimes(intent) but in torts(unintentional). Not only against private but against the commons.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-10-24 23:50:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320150659652616192

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1320150658075557888


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    3) The most intolerant wins in a battle of tolerances, just like the most adaptive wins in a battle of adaptation (innovation). The enemy specializes in exploiting the only substantial weakness in our civilization: tolerance.

    Thus, we require a law of zero tolerance.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1320150658075557888

  • IMPORTANT: Whether we say truth is a constraint of reciprocity, or reciprocity i

     

    IMPORTANT: Whether we say truth is a constraint of reciprocity, or reciprocity is a constraint of truth, depends on whether the context of the question is decidability in law (top-down) or decidability in physics (bottom-up). But it’s the same either way.

    —“Truth is what we test for in claims, reciprocity is what we test for in propositions.”— Martin Stepan

    METHOD: The method we use is exhaustive disambiguation, by serialization (into measurements), operationalization (commensurability of measurements), synthesis (commensurability of processes), incentives (opportunity), equilibria(counter opportunity. ie: Constructivism as falsificationism.