Curt Doolittle

Theme: Grammar

  • All Grammars Perform the Same Function

    Nov 1, 2019, 2:41 PM

    –“Logic is a type of math.”–

    Not quite true. all grammars perform the same function, providing a scope(dimensions) of permissible vocabulary, a set of comparison operators; and a grammar and syntax of continuous recursive disambiguation, all of which rely upon identity, similarity, and differences in constant relations, the simplest we know of which is arithmetic (positional names), and the next simplest of which are the first order logics, but all such grammars are simply variations on the human language facility: the use of a grammar, operators (vocabulary), and references(vocabulary) to produce transactions we call meaning.

  • All Grammars Perform the Same Function

    Nov 1, 2019, 2:41 PM

    –“Logic is a type of math.”–

    Not quite true. all grammars perform the same function, providing a scope(dimensions) of permissible vocabulary, a set of comparison operators; and a grammar and syntax of continuous recursive disambiguation, all of which rely upon identity, similarity, and differences in constant relations, the simplest we know of which is arithmetic (positional names), and the next simplest of which are the first order logics, but all such grammars are simply variations on the human language facility: the use of a grammar, operators (vocabulary), and references(vocabulary) to produce transactions we call meaning.

  • Definition: Disambiguation: Mistake vs Error

    Definition: Disambiguation: Mistake vs Error https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/definition-disambiguation-mistake-vs-error/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 05:25:58 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265514562943672321

  • Definition: Disambiguation: Mistake vs Error

    Nov 9, 2019, 10:20 AM

    —“Mistake(mistaken) vs. Error (err). Whats your distinction?”—Richard Hall

    ERROR: Errors in the construction of arguments that lead to erroneous conclusions (logic, operations) -vs- MISTAKE: Mistakes in articulation that do not lead to erroneous conclusions (explanation, example) I mean, I produce a lot of content, almost every day. So I make mistakes all the time. I make typos all the time, poor word choice, vocabulary mistakes, phrasing, or sentence structure, misquote, mis-remember, all sorts of things, and I tend to write in language that eliminates ‘optional’ words, and omg the list is endless. Those are mistakes. Errors would be the production of an argument that produced an irreciprocal or false conclusion.

  • Definition: Disambiguation: Mistake vs Error

    Nov 9, 2019, 10:20 AM

    —“Mistake(mistaken) vs. Error (err). Whats your distinction?”—Richard Hall

    ERROR: Errors in the construction of arguments that lead to erroneous conclusions (logic, operations) -vs- MISTAKE: Mistakes in articulation that do not lead to erroneous conclusions (explanation, example) I mean, I produce a lot of content, almost every day. So I make mistakes all the time. I make typos all the time, poor word choice, vocabulary mistakes, phrasing, or sentence structure, misquote, mis-remember, all sorts of things, and I tend to write in language that eliminates ‘optional’ words, and omg the list is endless. Those are mistakes. Errors would be the production of an argument that produced an irreciprocal or false conclusion.

  • The Series of Grammars of Psychology

    The Series of Grammars of Psychology https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/27/the-series-of-grammars-of-psychology/

    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-27 04:42:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265503554980188161

  • The Series of Grammars of Psychology

    Nov 24, 2019, 11:41 AM (important) (read this)

    —”is there any smaller sphere in which you think psychoanalysis is an appropriate method or inquiry? (ie, hopefully the one it is intended for – personal therapy rather than public argumentation).”— Gerard

    I think that it is always better to use this series:

    1. Means: Personality traits and reward systems. (anglo/physical)
    2. Cause: Acquisitionism and Propertarianism.(masculine/objective)
    3. Training: Stoicism (Acquisition of virtues by CBT)
    4. Affect(Heroic): Jungian ( Archetypes as proxies for traits) (german, sympathetic)

    5. Defect:(Victim)Freudian Analysis (feminine conformity) (Jewish feminine)

    This series begins with the most precise but least experiential and moves to the least precise but must experiential. Personally I would prefer, that we use the above series just like the series math, physics, chemistry, biology, cooperation (sentience/economics), speech (negotiation), that we all knew the hierarchy of those from the most physical to the most experiential, and as such that we understood how each expresses a more fictional but more experiential grammar as we proceed down that list. This series is as important as: 1. The hierarchy of Measurements (mathematics) 2. The hierarchy of States of Matter (physical science) 3. The hierarchy of Grammars (language) 4. The hierarchy of Knowledge (aristotelian categories) (repost) Edit

  • The Series of Grammars of Psychology

    Nov 24, 2019, 11:41 AM (important) (read this)

    —”is there any smaller sphere in which you think psychoanalysis is an appropriate method or inquiry? (ie, hopefully the one it is intended for – personal therapy rather than public argumentation).”— Gerard

    I think that it is always better to use this series:

    1. Means: Personality traits and reward systems. (anglo/physical)
    2. Cause: Acquisitionism and Propertarianism.(masculine/objective)
    3. Training: Stoicism (Acquisition of virtues by CBT)
    4. Affect(Heroic): Jungian ( Archetypes as proxies for traits) (german, sympathetic)

    5. Defect:(Victim)Freudian Analysis (feminine conformity) (Jewish feminine)

    This series begins with the most precise but least experiential and moves to the least precise but must experiential. Personally I would prefer, that we use the above series just like the series math, physics, chemistry, biology, cooperation (sentience/economics), speech (negotiation), that we all knew the hierarchy of those from the most physical to the most experiential, and as such that we understood how each expresses a more fictional but more experiential grammar as we proceed down that list. This series is as important as: 1. The hierarchy of Measurements (mathematics) 2. The hierarchy of States of Matter (physical science) 3. The hierarchy of Grammars (language) 4. The hierarchy of Knowledge (aristotelian categories) (repost) Edit

  • “Domestication” vs”Genetic Pacification”

    Dec 7, 2019, 9:33 AM

    –“Domestication isn’t defined the way you just defined it.”–

    As socrates said “define your terms”. A term must only be consistent with the use as the speaker defines it. We can use “Domestication” (reproductive selection) or the more unpleasant term “Genetic Pacification” (law, war). The truth is that we use both Domestication and Genetic Pacification. And the unpleasant truth is that Different fields use the same terms differently. Colloquial speaking people conflate them because they lack the specialized knowledge of those fields. A common series I deal with daily is {reason, rationalism, and logic}. So, in science, domestication of plants, animals, and man, refers to the same process: making useful (cooperative) with man, by breeding favorable traits and unfavorable traits. At present our understanding is driven by Soviet Scientist Dmitry Belyaev, and his demonstration that foxes could be domesticated in under ten generations. When we study this process what do we find? We find that we are breeding for the extension of youth, where plants grow, and animals grow, but neither achieves early or FULL maturity. In animals this reduces the impulse to fight, so that the brain can continue to develop. What does it develop instead of impulse? It maintains the socialization of youth, and gains agency over the self (consciousness, patience, and conscientiousness). So we are using the term as it is used in science. Humans domesticated themselves, plants, and animals – and some of us domesticated other peoples (and frankly are still trying but failing to do so).

  • “Domestication” vs”Genetic Pacification”

    Dec 7, 2019, 9:33 AM

    –“Domestication isn’t defined the way you just defined it.”–

    As socrates said “define your terms”. A term must only be consistent with the use as the speaker defines it. We can use “Domestication” (reproductive selection) or the more unpleasant term “Genetic Pacification” (law, war). The truth is that we use both Domestication and Genetic Pacification. And the unpleasant truth is that Different fields use the same terms differently. Colloquial speaking people conflate them because they lack the specialized knowledge of those fields. A common series I deal with daily is {reason, rationalism, and logic}. So, in science, domestication of plants, animals, and man, refers to the same process: making useful (cooperative) with man, by breeding favorable traits and unfavorable traits. At present our understanding is driven by Soviet Scientist Dmitry Belyaev, and his demonstration that foxes could be domesticated in under ten generations. When we study this process what do we find? We find that we are breeding for the extension of youth, where plants grow, and animals grow, but neither achieves early or FULL maturity. In animals this reduces the impulse to fight, so that the brain can continue to develop. What does it develop instead of impulse? It maintains the socialization of youth, and gains agency over the self (consciousness, patience, and conscientiousness). So we are using the term as it is used in science. Humans domesticated themselves, plants, and animals – and some of us domesticated other peoples (and frankly are still trying but failing to do so).