Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language – Issue 76: Language – Nautilus nautil.us Joel Davis This is an excellent example of marginal indifference in mental emotional and physical experiences. That we create narratives (fantasy narratives) to increase our scope of decidability within groups, by internally consistent systems of measurement (paradigms), doesn’t mean that the archetypes, plots, and patterns of rise and fall make vary whatsoever. They don’t. Period. All that matters is the competitive, <- cooperative, <- choice and < – sedative strategies embedded in the narrative. Just as hollywood has run out of narratives, and must devolve like every culture into increasingly complex series of rise and fall sequences, by increasingly complex combination of archetypes ( biases), leading eventually to either the richness of the hindo, or dead to the calcification of the abrahamic, or to the abandonment of the buddhist or stoic, these processes are deterministic and dependent upon easily identifiable variables. In other words forensic analysis (disambiguation, deflation, and operationalization) of every single mythology whether spiritual – occult -supernatural, magical-pseudoscientific, or allegorical-ideal-sophomoric, or simply (as we do in western literature) philosophy – essay – story – novel. The fact than one does not want to abandon his emotional satisfaction from experiencing those different philosophical sophomoric, pseudoscientific magical, and supernatural occult narratives, is no different from any other addiction. It’s just an addiction. Which is what buddhism negatively and the stoic-epicurean method positively seek to produce in REALITY not in imagination. Yes it is entirely possible to use narratives to create visions upon which people will coalesce because it presents a new set of paradigms, producing a new system of measurement, around which they can independently, without explicitly organization, coordinate their actions, toward a shared goal That is the purpose of all narratives whether at one or multiple points on the competitive< cooperative< choice and < sedative spectrum. And yes we can create those narratives in any of the grammars whether the most scientific or the most complete and extended conflation of occult, magical, sophomoric. But like there are only three weapons of influence (force-physical, ostracization-emotional, payment-intellectual), and only three sets of senses (physical, emotional, intellectual), there are only three means of circumventing reality: Magic (physical), occult (emotional) , sophomoric (intellectual), and there are only so many primary emotions (excitement-calm, reward-fear, dominance-submission), only three personality clusters (feminine-beta male, ascendent male (libertarian), and dominant male (conservative), and only so many personality traits derived from them (maybe 4-6), only so many archetypes that can be derived from them (maybe a dozen), and only one root narrative (rise -fall in some combination), and only so many plots (at most 30 or so). In other words, there is no narrative that any human being can compose for the purposes of providing a paradigm for individual, group, or national action, that is not reducible to a very simple strategy of acquisition using those variables. So when you say I have no theory, it’s simply not true. Its the most precise, fullly accounted theory ever developed and the reason is simply because the 20th gave us so man y political failures, but it gave us information as the unit of measurement for modeling all of the universe, it gave us programming(directed) and AI(self organizing), it gave us cognitive science, and it gave us biochemistry, and genetics. And sorry but my work is built upon nothing but entropy upward competing with evidence top down. And i know it is humiliating for sophists (verbalists) who concieve of the world verbally, as it is for occultists who concieve of the world emotionally, but this is the story of our evolution of knowledge: the incremental reduction of ignorance by the incremental increase in the precision of measurement of categories, by reducing them to sets of constant relations coherent, consistent, correspondent, and existentially possible, in the universe under those deterministic rules we call realism, naturalism, and operationalism
Theme: Grammar
-
Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language
Why Red Means Red in Almost Every Language – Issue 76: Language – Nautilus nautil.us Joel Davis This is an excellent example of marginal indifference in mental emotional and physical experiences. That we create narratives (fantasy narratives) to increase our scope of decidability within groups, by internally consistent systems of measurement (paradigms), doesn’t mean that the archetypes, plots, and patterns of rise and fall make vary whatsoever. They don’t. Period. All that matters is the competitive, <- cooperative, <- choice and < – sedative strategies embedded in the narrative. Just as hollywood has run out of narratives, and must devolve like every culture into increasingly complex series of rise and fall sequences, by increasingly complex combination of archetypes ( biases), leading eventually to either the richness of the hindo, or dead to the calcification of the abrahamic, or to the abandonment of the buddhist or stoic, these processes are deterministic and dependent upon easily identifiable variables. In other words forensic analysis (disambiguation, deflation, and operationalization) of every single mythology whether spiritual – occult -supernatural, magical-pseudoscientific, or allegorical-ideal-sophomoric, or simply (as we do in western literature) philosophy – essay – story – novel. The fact than one does not want to abandon his emotional satisfaction from experiencing those different philosophical sophomoric, pseudoscientific magical, and supernatural occult narratives, is no different from any other addiction. It’s just an addiction. Which is what buddhism negatively and the stoic-epicurean method positively seek to produce in REALITY not in imagination. Yes it is entirely possible to use narratives to create visions upon which people will coalesce because it presents a new set of paradigms, producing a new system of measurement, around which they can independently, without explicitly organization, coordinate their actions, toward a shared goal That is the purpose of all narratives whether at one or multiple points on the competitive< cooperative< choice and < sedative spectrum. And yes we can create those narratives in any of the grammars whether the most scientific or the most complete and extended conflation of occult, magical, sophomoric. But like there are only three weapons of influence (force-physical, ostracization-emotional, payment-intellectual), and only three sets of senses (physical, emotional, intellectual), there are only three means of circumventing reality: Magic (physical), occult (emotional) , sophomoric (intellectual), and there are only so many primary emotions (excitement-calm, reward-fear, dominance-submission), only three personality clusters (feminine-beta male, ascendent male (libertarian), and dominant male (conservative), and only so many personality traits derived from them (maybe 4-6), only so many archetypes that can be derived from them (maybe a dozen), and only one root narrative (rise -fall in some combination), and only so many plots (at most 30 or so). In other words, there is no narrative that any human being can compose for the purposes of providing a paradigm for individual, group, or national action, that is not reducible to a very simple strategy of acquisition using those variables. So when you say I have no theory, it’s simply not true. Its the most precise, fullly accounted theory ever developed and the reason is simply because the 20th gave us so man y political failures, but it gave us information as the unit of measurement for modeling all of the universe, it gave us programming(directed) and AI(self organizing), it gave us cognitive science, and it gave us biochemistry, and genetics. And sorry but my work is built upon nothing but entropy upward competing with evidence top down. And i know it is humiliating for sophists (verbalists) who concieve of the world verbally, as it is for occultists who concieve of the world emotionally, but this is the story of our evolution of knowledge: the incremental reduction of ignorance by the incremental increase in the precision of measurement of categories, by reducing them to sets of constant relations coherent, consistent, correspondent, and existentially possible, in the universe under those deterministic rules we call realism, naturalism, and operationalism
-
Propertarianism Is a System of Thought Just Like Aristotelianism
PROPERTARIANISM IS A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT JUST LIKE ARISTOTELIANISM WHICH IT SEEKS TO COMPLETE Let’s disambiguate Propertarianism a bit. We use the term “Propertarianism” as a brand name. But, Propertarianism as constructed is just a methodology: an Operational Logic of the human sciences. Technically speaking propertarianism refers to the unit of measurement for demonstrated interests (expenditures) in individual action and interpersonal and group cooperation. This methodology makes use of not less than the following reformation of the aristotelian categories and their merger with the sciences: (a) physics – (realism, naturalism, entropy, operationalism) (b) vitruvianism (the grammars) – metaphysics, (c) acquisitionism – psychology, (d) compatibilism – sociology, (e) propertarianism (reciprocity) – ethics (f) testimonialism – epistemology (logic, emp, oprer.) (g) Sovereigntarianism (rule of law) – politics (h) Adaptive Velocity – group strategy (i) Transcendence (eugenics, heroism, excellence, beauty) – Aesthetics As far as I now there is no other system of thought anywhere ear complete, nor one that is value neutral, other than aristotle’s attempt. SOVEREIGNTARIANISM Sovereigntarianism is a political methodology, or what we used to call philosophy, that uses the aristotelian-propertarian paradigm and methodology. PERFECT GOVERNMENT Perfect Government is a recommended organization of governments that can – like the roman- react to stress and war, operating as a growing concern – and distributing windfalls. This government differs from the modern in that it is less optimistic of human character, and suppresses falsehood and rent seeking of all kinds, and definnacializes the polity, and depoliticizes the polity, so that people are limited to the market of voluntary cooperation to improve their lives. This government is described using a set of levers so to speak (set of choices) that vary according to market demand for government, from the most authoritarian in war, to the most redistributive under windfalls, while at the same time eliminating the ability of individuals and groups to accumulate rents and corruption (calcification) that always and everywhere brings down a polities from the village to the empire.
- Propertarianism > Methodology
- Sovereigntarianism > Socio-legal methodology
- Perfect Government > Economic-political-military methodology.
As far as I know there is no program as large, or as complete, or as scientific as Propertarianism in human history and the best we have so far is the set of empirical disciplines that have been as much a tragedy as a benefit to us. Because empiricism = correspondence it does not equal causality. Operationalism equals causality. Thanks. I hope this helps newbs.
-
Propertarianism Is a System of Thought Just Like Aristotelianism
PROPERTARIANISM IS A SYSTEM OF THOUGHT JUST LIKE ARISTOTELIANISM WHICH IT SEEKS TO COMPLETE Let’s disambiguate Propertarianism a bit. We use the term “Propertarianism” as a brand name. But, Propertarianism as constructed is just a methodology: an Operational Logic of the human sciences. Technically speaking propertarianism refers to the unit of measurement for demonstrated interests (expenditures) in individual action and interpersonal and group cooperation. This methodology makes use of not less than the following reformation of the aristotelian categories and their merger with the sciences: (a) physics – (realism, naturalism, entropy, operationalism) (b) vitruvianism (the grammars) – metaphysics, (c) acquisitionism – psychology, (d) compatibilism – sociology, (e) propertarianism (reciprocity) – ethics (f) testimonialism – epistemology (logic, emp, oprer.) (g) Sovereigntarianism (rule of law) – politics (h) Adaptive Velocity – group strategy (i) Transcendence (eugenics, heroism, excellence, beauty) – Aesthetics As far as I now there is no other system of thought anywhere ear complete, nor one that is value neutral, other than aristotle’s attempt. SOVEREIGNTARIANISM Sovereigntarianism is a political methodology, or what we used to call philosophy, that uses the aristotelian-propertarian paradigm and methodology. PERFECT GOVERNMENT Perfect Government is a recommended organization of governments that can – like the roman- react to stress and war, operating as a growing concern – and distributing windfalls. This government differs from the modern in that it is less optimistic of human character, and suppresses falsehood and rent seeking of all kinds, and definnacializes the polity, and depoliticizes the polity, so that people are limited to the market of voluntary cooperation to improve their lives. This government is described using a set of levers so to speak (set of choices) that vary according to market demand for government, from the most authoritarian in war, to the most redistributive under windfalls, while at the same time eliminating the ability of individuals and groups to accumulate rents and corruption (calcification) that always and everywhere brings down a polities from the village to the empire.
- Propertarianism > Methodology
- Sovereigntarianism > Socio-legal methodology
- Perfect Government > Economic-political-military methodology.
As far as I know there is no program as large, or as complete, or as scientific as Propertarianism in human history and the best we have so far is the set of empirical disciplines that have been as much a tragedy as a benefit to us. Because empiricism = correspondence it does not equal causality. Operationalism equals causality. Thanks. I hope this helps newbs.
-
More on Lying
—“What is the argument against selfish lying if it serves my self interest, assuming the majority of people don’t lie to burst the language bubble.”– Gyeff @Gyeff
SPECTRUMTransparent Lies – Signal Conformity White Lies – provide comfort to the psyche Grey Lies – protect from consequences of accident, impropriety, or folly Black Lies – Pursue gains by means of deceit Evil Lies – Pursue harm for the sake of harm. People are amoral, and immoral or moral as suits their interests. People conspire ie, cheat, steal, harm and murder as suits their interests.We have just worked very hard to create institutions such that it doesn’t suit their interests. Lying is one of the hardest crimes to limit… …because we continually shift techniques such that we need only raise the cost of truth discovery by creating ambiguity such that lie is indistinguishable from ignorance, error, or natural limitations in judgement and prediction. As such only westerners have succeeded in such suppression of falsehood, that we are able to produce high trust commons, and the means by which we evolved that tradition is almost impossible to replicate without intentionally designing a legal system for it (which I did.) So like manythings, truth telling is just a tax. Truth Before Face, Before Gain, Before All, regardless of impact to the competence-dominance hierarchy is uniquely western. But it is the primary reason for our sovereignty, liberty, freedom, prosperity, and dominion over nature.
-
More on Lying
—“What is the argument against selfish lying if it serves my self interest, assuming the majority of people don’t lie to burst the language bubble.”– Gyeff @Gyeff
SPECTRUMTransparent Lies – Signal Conformity White Lies – provide comfort to the psyche Grey Lies – protect from consequences of accident, impropriety, or folly Black Lies – Pursue gains by means of deceit Evil Lies – Pursue harm for the sake of harm. People are amoral, and immoral or moral as suits their interests. People conspire ie, cheat, steal, harm and murder as suits their interests.We have just worked very hard to create institutions such that it doesn’t suit their interests. Lying is one of the hardest crimes to limit… …because we continually shift techniques such that we need only raise the cost of truth discovery by creating ambiguity such that lie is indistinguishable from ignorance, error, or natural limitations in judgement and prediction. As such only westerners have succeeded in such suppression of falsehood, that we are able to produce high trust commons, and the means by which we evolved that tradition is almost impossible to replicate without intentionally designing a legal system for it (which I did.) So like manythings, truth telling is just a tax. Truth Before Face, Before Gain, Before All, regardless of impact to the competence-dominance hierarchy is uniquely western. But it is the primary reason for our sovereignty, liberty, freedom, prosperity, and dominion over nature.
-
Q: Most Philosophers Are Terrible Writers
Oct 20, 2019, 8:35 PM
—“most philosophers are terrible writers”—
Yep. Well, there are a number of good reasons, the first of which is the attempt to construct a new paradigm using existing language – some of which, like aristotle’s is clarifying, some of which like Heidegger is obscurant, and some of which like derrida is intentionally for the purpose of furthering deception. So between paradigmatic problems, novelty problems, and truth, analogy, poetic (nietzsche), fictionalization (Shopenhauer), and deceit (derrida, freud, adorno), and the academic failure to create a science out of formal logic (it’s all tautology so it doesn’t matter), then there is a lot of room for bad writing. lol 😉 I think writing well is very hard. I’ve been writing profusely most of my life and I don’t think I was really worth reading until I was in my thirties (although my subject matter was part of the problem). My subject matter is still a problem… lol But writing characters, scenes and dialog using the various points of view, in various order, with various plots, with various characters … I mean, I think it’s really hard to write fiction well. I can’t bear reading much of it. I’ve nearly lost my ability to read fiction. (which apparently is more common than I thought)
-
Q: Most Philosophers Are Terrible Writers
Oct 20, 2019, 8:35 PM
—“most philosophers are terrible writers”—
Yep. Well, there are a number of good reasons, the first of which is the attempt to construct a new paradigm using existing language – some of which, like aristotle’s is clarifying, some of which like Heidegger is obscurant, and some of which like derrida is intentionally for the purpose of furthering deception. So between paradigmatic problems, novelty problems, and truth, analogy, poetic (nietzsche), fictionalization (Shopenhauer), and deceit (derrida, freud, adorno), and the academic failure to create a science out of formal logic (it’s all tautology so it doesn’t matter), then there is a lot of room for bad writing. lol 😉 I think writing well is very hard. I’ve been writing profusely most of my life and I don’t think I was really worth reading until I was in my thirties (although my subject matter was part of the problem). My subject matter is still a problem… lol But writing characters, scenes and dialog using the various points of view, in various order, with various plots, with various characters … I mean, I think it’s really hard to write fiction well. I can’t bear reading much of it. I’ve nearly lost my ability to read fiction. (which apparently is more common than I thought)
-
Disambiguating P for Mass Consumption?
How do we disambiguate P-Method, P-Law, and a P-Constitution Template, and P-Constitutions for Each Polity?
The system of thought we call propertarianism – that would be better called ‘natural law’ or ‘Testmonialism’ – is a methodology that completes the sciences by completing the transformation of traditional philosophical categories of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, and aesthetics as well as the pseudo-sciences of psychology, sociology, and political science into a single science with a uniform fully commensurable operational vocabulary and logic. Where “Operational” might be better stated in philosophical terms “realism, naturalism, operationalism (human actions).
With this uniformity provides the ability to write constitution and law in value-neutral prose fully commensurable across all peoples, all, disciplines and all contexts.
We can write any constitution for any people using any group strategy in this P-law – as long as we state it under realism, naturalism, operationalism, sovereignty, and reciprocity – where reciprocity includes testimonial speech.
The only unique properties of a P-law constitution are (a) the suppression of false and ir-reciprocal speech, (b) operational and technical language that prohibits misinterpretation, interpretation, and arbitrary extension.
Using P-method, and P-law, I wrote the The P-consitution as a template for a flexible government that varies from authoritarian to market to redistributive dependent upon circumstances that create demand for different government, and it includes a set of options for government from authoritarian or authoritarian monarchy to multi-house social democracy, and everything in between.
The P-Constitution for the USA is tailored for the problems of the Anglo Civilization (UK, USA, Canada, and Australia-NZ), and I would need to tailor one for western Europe, eastern europe (Intermarium), and one for Russia. But it’s possible to write one for any and every civilization in entirely truthful terms – and there is little reason to do otherwise, since each civilization survives by competing on its terms, and its terms can be stated truthfully (realism, naturalism, operationalism, testimonialism).
-
Disambiguating P for Mass Consumption?
How do we disambiguate P-Method, P-Law, and a P-Constitution Template, and P-Constitutions for Each Polity?
The system of thought we call propertarianism – that would be better called ‘natural law’ or ‘Testmonialism’ – is a methodology that completes the sciences by completing the transformation of traditional philosophical categories of metaphysics, epistemology, ethics, politics, and aesthetics as well as the pseudo-sciences of psychology, sociology, and political science into a single science with a uniform fully commensurable operational vocabulary and logic. Where “Operational” might be better stated in philosophical terms “realism, naturalism, operationalism (human actions).
With this uniformity provides the ability to write constitution and law in value-neutral prose fully commensurable across all peoples, all, disciplines and all contexts.
We can write any constitution for any people using any group strategy in this P-law – as long as we state it under realism, naturalism, operationalism, sovereignty, and reciprocity – where reciprocity includes testimonial speech.
The only unique properties of a P-law constitution are (a) the suppression of false and ir-reciprocal speech, (b) operational and technical language that prohibits misinterpretation, interpretation, and arbitrary extension.
Using P-method, and P-law, I wrote the The P-consitution as a template for a flexible government that varies from authoritarian to market to redistributive dependent upon circumstances that create demand for different government, and it includes a set of options for government from authoritarian or authoritarian monarchy to multi-house social democracy, and everything in between.
The P-Constitution for the USA is tailored for the problems of the Anglo Civilization (UK, USA, Canada, and Australia-NZ), and I would need to tailor one for western Europe, eastern europe (Intermarium), and one for Russia. But it’s possible to write one for any and every civilization in entirely truthful terms – and there is little reason to do otherwise, since each civilization survives by competing on its terms, and its terms can be stated truthfully (realism, naturalism, operationalism, testimonialism).