Curt Doolittle

Theme: Grammar

  • But vocabularies reflect associative paradigms whether physical-actionable-obser

    But vocabularies reflect associative paradigms whether physical-actionable-observable, verbal-analogistic-sophistic, or intuitionistic-emotional-occult. There are only so many logics available to the human mind since we are always dependent upon those three human faculties.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 17:20:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363539100607905792

    Reply addressees: @Imperius__13 @ThruTheHayes

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363537459418644483

  • Notes on Dyer and Thomas’ first video.

    Jay’s argument should be ‘Logical’ only means internally consistent in the pursuit of an end, vs True, meaning testimonial, meaning testifiable, meaning non-conflationary, consistent, actionable, correspondent, coherent, limited, and complete under realism, naturalism and operationalism, free of loading, framing, suggestion and obscurantism. Ergo as wisdom literature, all faiths are some degree of logical in the sense of internally consistent and utilitarian. They are true in the lower standard of providing a paradigm of action that produces desird ends. They are not “true” in the sense that they are also testifiable.

    The Christian faith is logical within the conflationary system of thought that is not limited by constraints of testimony under realism, naturalism, non-conflation (identity), operationalism (actionability) and correspondence. The fact that Christian theology as wisdom literature has produced the most complete system of non-aggression, tolerance, submission, non-adversarialism, and produces exceptional serfs, peasants, citizens, and to some degree sovereigns is simply a fact because it trains the intuition by continuous reinforcement of the suppression of dominance expression (at rather obvious costs).
    (I’ve come to agree with the criticism of Protestantism largely because it causes doubling down on occultism and sophistry rather than the nearly legalistic discipline of the catholic church. That said, as far as I can tell, the competition between romanticism – the restoration of natural religion – and Christianity, and marxism-secularism in the 1800’s in response to the scientific, industrial, and Darwinian evolution, meant a failure of romanticism was the great missed opportunity to restore our religion of the primacy of man and our transcendence through action INTO gods. The church failed to reform into natural law and science as evidence of our greater understanding of god’s will, and the success of marxism as a materialistic promise of reward in life after revolution in the modern world, like supernatural promise of reward in an afterlife in the ancient world. )
    The problem is that it teaches Christians to lie using the Abrahamic system of lying. Although again, there is a difference between an evolutionary one (science), a beneficial but stagnating wisdom literature (Christianity), a parasitic wisdom lit (Judaism), or a predatory and destructive one (Islam). (Dylan has gone from philosophy(justification) to sophistry (verbalism) to theology (occult). Some of us evolve from mythology to history to science producing testimony. Some of us evolve from mythology to theology to occultism. It depends on whether you were born with the feminine bias in empathic understanding or the masculine bias in analytic understanding. That’s why religiosity is heritable, and those of us who have a lesser NEED for empathy choose the sciences. It’s not complicated. Although we might have to separate just as the left and right must separate. Because as far as I can tell what I think we are seeing is a restoration of demand for speciation now that the agrarian age of homogenization is over.

  • Notes on Dyer and Thomas’ first video.

    Jay’s argument should be ‘Logical’ only means internally consistent in the pursuit of an end, vs True, meaning testimonial, meaning testifiable, meaning non-conflationary, consistent, actionable, correspondent, coherent, limited, and complete under realism, naturalism and operationalism, free of loading, framing, suggestion and obscurantism. Ergo as wisdom literature, all faiths are some degree of logical in the sense of internally consistent and utilitarian. They are true in the lower standard of providing a paradigm of action that produces desird ends. They are not “true” in the sense that they are also testifiable.

    The Christian faith is logical within the conflationary system of thought that is not limited by constraints of testimony under realism, naturalism, non-conflation (identity), operationalism (actionability) and correspondence. The fact that Christian theology as wisdom literature has produced the most complete system of non-aggression, tolerance, submission, non-adversarialism, and produces exceptional serfs, peasants, citizens, and to some degree sovereigns is simply a fact because it trains the intuition by continuous reinforcement of the suppression of dominance expression (at rather obvious costs).
    (I’ve come to agree with the criticism of Protestantism largely because it causes doubling down on occultism and sophistry rather than the nearly legalistic discipline of the catholic church. That said, as far as I can tell, the competition between romanticism – the restoration of natural religion – and Christianity, and marxism-secularism in the 1800’s in response to the scientific, industrial, and Darwinian evolution, meant a failure of romanticism was the great missed opportunity to restore our religion of the primacy of man and our transcendence through action INTO gods. The church failed to reform into natural law and science as evidence of our greater understanding of god’s will, and the success of marxism as a materialistic promise of reward in life after revolution in the modern world, like supernatural promise of reward in an afterlife in the ancient world. )
    The problem is that it teaches Christians to lie using the Abrahamic system of lying. Although again, there is a difference between an evolutionary one (science), a beneficial but stagnating wisdom literature (Christianity), a parasitic wisdom lit (Judaism), or a predatory and destructive one (Islam). (Dylan has gone from philosophy(justification) to sophistry (verbalism) to theology (occult). Some of us evolve from mythology to history to science producing testimony. Some of us evolve from mythology to theology to occultism. It depends on whether you were born with the feminine bias in empathic understanding or the masculine bias in analytic understanding. That’s why religiosity is heritable, and those of us who have a lesser NEED for empathy choose the sciences. It’s not complicated. Although we might have to separate just as the left and right must separate. Because as far as I can tell what I think we are seeing is a restoration of demand for speciation now that the agrarian age of homogenization is over.

  • You know, a lot of people throw the term ‘word salad’ at me because I draw from

    You know, a lot of people throw the term ‘word salad’ at me because I draw from knowledge of so many fields. But it just means they’re either ignorant or implying it’s possible to convey ideas without cross-disciplinary reference – when my argument consists of those patterns.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-19 15:52:53 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362792279971418116

    Reply addressees: @JuliusBranson

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362790893313536000

  • This helps too: People need words that transform from concepts to analogies to m

    This helps too: People need words that transform from concepts to analogies to m

    This helps too:
    People need words that transform from concepts to analogies to measurements.

    P-Logic and Law converts language to MEASUREMENTS. https://t.co/x0eB9OMiKz

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-18 23:48:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362549690374516742

    Reply addressees: @TruthQuest11

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362542188081668097

  • When you serve in the military what does the command “report” demand of the subo

    When you serve in the military what does the command “report” demand of the subordinate? When you testify in court what does it demand of the subordinate? When we use ‘truth-before-face’ to compare civilizational difference what does it demand of the speaker? What do they share?

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-18 14:56:15 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362415637667188737

    Reply addressees: @factandrumor

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1362413411045359623

  • 4. So in physics we know the first principle down to the standard model, but we

    4. So in physics we know the first principle down to the standard model, but we do not know the geometry of the next ‘grammar’ down, that produces the standard model.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-13 05:15:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360457455914913793

    Reply addressees: @torinmccabe @BlurmpfG @PROPERTARYAN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360457247265083393

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @torinmccabe @BlurmpfG @PROPERTARYAN 3. So we can experiment in via Positiva legislation within the limits of the first principles of law, just as we can experiment with via positive constructions of chemistry but the first principles do not change.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1360457247265083393

  • You aren’t making a criticism. You are saying that it isn’t possible to use logi

    You aren’t making a criticism. You are saying that it isn’t possible to use logic to test the logic of statements. Yet it is. We aren’t testing hypotheses. We’re testing whether you can make a truth claim, when that truth claim imposes costs upon others demonstrated interests.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-13 04:04:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360439783470825477

    Reply addressees: @torinmccabe @PROPERTARYAN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360438860887584774

  • All cross disciplinary disambiguation requires negotiation of terms. Like I said

    All cross disciplinary disambiguation requires negotiation of terms. Like I said. Walking thru the chain of reasoning would have been time consuming and lost the audience. We got there. European civ developed science because empirical law was our first institution.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-12 05:16:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1360095342449065988

    Reply addressees: @LiarExtinction @jollyheretic

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359990919584448521

  • That’s an incorrect categorization. Language facility > spoken language (ideomat

    That’s an incorrect categorization.
    Language facility > spoken language (ideomatic, decarative, narrative, argumentative) > written language > formal language > logics.

    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-11 15:46:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359891565238444033

    Reply addressees: @WalterIII @WorMartiN

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1359888203117776898