Theme: Grammar

And so again we come to declarative (is) vs imperative (can, must, should). And

And so again we come to declarative (is) vs imperative (can, must, should). And the difference is decidability in matters of conflict (is) vs decidability in matters of agreement (can must should). Via negativa law vs via positiva philosophy, and conflation of both by theology.

Source date (UTC): 2021-02-02 16:49:22 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356645899137667077

Reply addressees: @Imperius__13

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356645538632982529

IN REPLY TO:

Unknown author

@Imperius__13 Beauty is no different from any other experience, or any other truth. We have exerperiences, associations based on them, and personal valuations of them for extremely ideosyncratic reasons. So knowing First Causes (what I do) only provides understanding not prescription.

Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1356645538632982529

February 2, 2021
Body: Sense > Model > Perception > Auto Association > Auto-Prediction > Valuatio

Body: Sense > Model > Perception > Auto Association > Auto-Prediction > Valuation > Recursion:
Langauge:Continuous recursive disambiguation:
Promise: Speech: Existential > Declarative > Imperative > Agree/Not:
Evidence: Actions: Invariant .> True-False .> Success-Fail > Agree/Not

Source date (UTC): 2021-02-02 16:27:17 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356640341143785472

Reply addressees: @Imperius__13

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356616502854746116

February 2, 2021
Aaron: implies that what was written, what has been taught, what is practiced, a

Aaron: implies that what was written, what has been taught, what is practiced, and what is observed behavior, are the same. That’s just not true. I can translate the works of most marxist-neo’s-promos into ordinary scientific economic prose and they’re rebelling against Darwin.

Source date (UTC): 2021-02-01 23:47:18 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356388688301871104

Reply addressees: @ARossP

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1356351879962370050

February 1, 2021
Learning P-Law vs Philosophy, Psychology or Sociology

There is a difference between mythology, theology, philosophy, science, and logic – and in logic between mathematics(existence), action(operations), and words(logic of lanquage). They share a common grammar but uncommon paradigms and vocabulary – from Inflationary to deflationary. So what I do, what we do, is operational logic of behavior where decidability is provided by tests of reciprocity and testimony – that is what law – scientific law – consists of. Scientific Law, Natural Law, and “accordance with nature” and the laws of the universe are synonyms. And so if you have had training in ‘literary’ thought it will be almost useless in understanding P-Logic and P-Law. Because P-Law is an operational logic (like programming), uses behavioral logic from economics, and legal decidability by tests of reciprocity, and testifiability. Max Weber warned the social sciences that all fields would eventually be reduced to some sort of calculation. P-Logic and P-Law are constructivist logics that provide calculability in the behavioral sciences (cog sci, language, psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics).

January 30, 2021
Learning P-Law vs Philosophy, Psychology or Sociology

There is a difference between mythology, theology, philosophy, science, and logic – and in logic between mathematics(existence), action(operations), and words(logic of lanquage). They share a common grammar but uncommon paradigms and vocabulary – from Inflationary to deflationary. So what I do, what we do, is operational logic of behavior where decidability is provided by tests of reciprocity and testimony – that is what law – scientific law – consists of. Scientific Law, Natural Law, and “accordance with nature” and the laws of the universe are synonyms. And so if you have had training in ‘literary’ thought it will be almost useless in understanding P-Logic and P-Law. Because P-Law is an operational logic (like programming), uses behavioral logic from economics, and legal decidability by tests of reciprocity, and testifiability. Max Weber warned the social sciences that all fields would eventually be reduced to some sort of calculation. P-Logic and P-Law are constructivist logics that provide calculability in the behavioral sciences (cog sci, language, psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics).

January 30, 2021
@CaptainBoner well, you know, what I learned from working on the grammars is tha

@CaptainBoner well, you know, what I learned from working on the grammars is that all sciences and all language that we use in them are consistent. So as far as I know the sciences (logics, physical, behavioral, evolutionary ) are all unified now. and all the theoretical, fictional and fictionalisms follow the same rules as well. So, the future ought to be as radically different from the 1900’s as the 1800s were from the 1600’s.

Source date (UTC): 2021-01-29 21:31:27 UTC

Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105641141017651002

January 29, 2021
LEARNING P-LAW VS PHILOSOPHY, PSYCHOLOGY OR SOCIOLOGY There is a difference betw

LEARNING P-LAW VS PHILOSOPHY, PSYCHOLOGY OR SOCIOLOGY

There is a difference between mythology, theology, philosophy, science, and logic – and in logic between mathematics(existence), action(operations), and words(logic of lanquage). They share a common grammar but uncommon paradigms and vocabulary – from Inflationary to deflationary.

So what I do, what we do, is operational logic of behavior where decidability is provided by tests of reciprocity and testimony – that is what law – scientific law – consists of. Scientific Law, Natural Law, and “accordance with nature” and the laws of the universe are synonyms.

And so if you have had training in ‘literary’ thought it will be almost useless in understanding P-Logic and P-Law. Because P-Law is an operational logic (like programming), uses behavioral logic from economics, and legal decidability by tests of reciprocity, and testifiability.

Max Weber warned the social sciences that all fields would eventually be reduced to some sort of calculation. P-Logic and P-Law are constructivist logics that provide calculability in the behavioral sciences (cog sci, language, psychology, sociology, ethics, law, and politics).

Source date (UTC): 2021-01-29 21:08:42 UTC

Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105641051564707460

January 29, 2021
Repeat: The logic of Identity: Physical (math) The logic of Sets: Words (verbal

Repeat:
The logic of Identity: Physical (math)
The logic of Sets: Words (verbal logic)
The logic of Operations: Actions (algorithms, programming)

Source date (UTC): 2021-01-27 22:00:49 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1354549952769372161

January 27, 2021
(Grammar) It’s Similar TO one another. And Different FROM one another. Ok? Drive

(Grammar)
It’s Similar TO one another. And Different FROM one another.
Ok? Drives me nuts.

Source date (UTC): 2021-01-27 02:48:53 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1354260057022722049

January 27, 2021
Testimonialism for short, or Formal Natural Law, or the formal logic of behavior

Testimonialism for short, or Formal Natural Law, or the formal logic of behavioral science? I dunno.

Libertarianism > Propertarianism(Ethics) > Testimonialism(scientific method) > Formal Natural Law > The formal logic of teh behavioral sciences?

Source date (UTC): 2021-01-24 17:25:28 UTC

Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1353393494883250176

Reply addressees: @TruthQuest11

Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1353369700294647819

January 24, 2021