Curt Doolittle

Theme: Grammar

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552152263 Timestamp) TRAINING in operational prose, logic, and grammar would help all people communicate just like the same operational prose, logic, and grammar help the scientific community communicate – although P-law, in addition covers not just the physical sciences but the human (psychology, sociology, ethics, law, politics, group strategy, and literature) But just as one cannot hope to communicate in mathematics or physics or chemistry or law without training in those disciplines, one cannot hope to communicate in the Human Sciences, and in particular ‘morality’ without training in the language and method of doing so. Ergo, One can train people in the logic of cooperation but one cannot discourse with people unless they are so trained. the reason being that one can never divorce himself from cognitive bias, and accumulated disinformation without that training any more than one can grasp physics without training – Sciences exist because such things are beyond the limits of our personal comprehension without systems of measurement to eliminate our biases and disinformation. So, yes, if you learn the propertarian method you can speak in measurements. Those measurements are not all that complicated really. But it appears to take about six months to two years to learn them today. And, I assume we can cut that to less time with the courses. cheers

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552152263 Timestamp) TRAINING in operational prose, logic, and grammar would help all people communicate just like the same operational prose, logic, and grammar help the scientific community communicate – although P-law, in addition covers not just the physical sciences but the human (psychology, sociology, ethics, law, politics, group strategy, and literature) But just as one cannot hope to communicate in mathematics or physics or chemistry or law without training in those disciplines, one cannot hope to communicate in the Human Sciences, and in particular ‘morality’ without training in the language and method of doing so. Ergo, One can train people in the logic of cooperation but one cannot discourse with people unless they are so trained. the reason being that one can never divorce himself from cognitive bias, and accumulated disinformation without that training any more than one can grasp physics without training – Sciences exist because such things are beyond the limits of our personal comprehension without systems of measurement to eliminate our biases and disinformation. So, yes, if you learn the propertarian method you can speak in measurements. Those measurements are not all that complicated really. But it appears to take about six months to two years to learn them today. And, I assume we can cut that to less time with the courses. cheers

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552316814 Timestamp) Thought I have been working with: “Any argument, theory, definition, should be incomprehensible until it is only comprehensible without error.” Regarding: —“1. Objective truth (what is, something generally agreed we can never ‘be completely sure of’, but as a concept Peterson certainly does believe this exists); 2. scientific truth (our best guess through the scientific method, at attainment of some constrained resolution of objective truth); and 3. pragmatic truth (verification of a bounded hypothesis adjusted by feedback, which Peterson agrees has all sorts of precision limitations).”— I handle this by dropping the term truth, and adopting decidability. Such that truth remains what it is, and we are seeking decidability sufficient for market demand.

  • (FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundament

    (FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundamental innovations in Propertarianism 1 – The Dimensional warranty of due diligence 2 – The Periodic Table of speech (Grammars) 3 – The Operational language and grammar in ePrime 4 – The Method of producing serialized Definitions (Disambiguation) 5 – Property in toto and the completion of the anarchic program in a reduction of social science to statements of changes in the state of ‘property’ (interests). -update- (correct link to pdf version: https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/periodic-table-of-speech-draft2-6.pdf )

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552425214 Timestamp) Teaching people GRAMMAR so that they can DECODE speech is not the same as teaching people to speak exclusively in decoded speech. We have been teaching people grammar, logic, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy since the medieval era. Written speech is more rigorous than spoken. contract language more rigorous than written. P-speech more rigorous than contract. And the purpose of this speech is to construct law that is not open to ‘interpretation’ and therefore closed to ‘legislation from the bench’. —“In my experience one only need set about resolving oneself to use honest and clear wording to express one’s points/stance while being as factually based as possible. “— And so what’s the difference other than a formal method for doing so that also defends against error, and bias? And how would I hold you accountable for speaking honestly without some method for testing your speech – rather than just depend on your OPINION as to whether you speak honestly. What you MEAN is that you don’t want to be forced to learn how to do such a thing. And you don’t want such a thing embodied in law, because you don’t want to be accountable for your words. Right?

  • (FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundament

    (FB 1552576600 Timestamp) THE PERIODIC TABLE OF SPEECH There are a few fundamental innovations in Propertarianism 1 – The Dimensional warranty of due diligence 2 – The Periodic Table of speech (Grammars) 3 – The Operational language and grammar in ePrime 4 – The Method of producing serialized Definitions (Disambiguation) 5 – Property in toto and the completion of the anarchic program in a reduction of social science to statements of changes in the state of ‘property’ (interests). -update- (correct link to pdf version: https://curtdoolittle.com/wp-content/uploads/2026/03/periodic-table-of-speech-draft2-2.pdf )

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552425214 Timestamp) Teaching people GRAMMAR so that they can DECODE speech is not the same as teaching people to speak exclusively in decoded speech. We have been teaching people grammar, logic, rhetoric, arithmetic, geometry, music, and astronomy since the medieval era. Written speech is more rigorous than spoken. contract language more rigorous than written. P-speech more rigorous than contract. And the purpose of this speech is to construct law that is not open to ‘interpretation’ and therefore closed to ‘legislation from the bench’. —“In my experience one only need set about resolving oneself to use honest and clear wording to express one’s points/stance while being as factually based as possible. “— And so what’s the difference other than a formal method for doing so that also defends against error, and bias? And how would I hold you accountable for speaking honestly without some method for testing your speech – rather than just depend on your OPINION as to whether you speak honestly. What you MEAN is that you don’t want to be forced to learn how to do such a thing. And you don’t want such a thing embodied in law, because you don’t want to be accountable for your words. Right?

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552840376 Timestamp) Propertarian Speech means every man a sherriff – it’s the OPPOSITE of postmodern speech where every woman is a liar.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1553400682 Timestamp) ummm.. language consists of a stream of continuous recursive disambiguation consisting of what we would call stories of changes in state, culminating in a series 1.comprehension, 2.agreement/disagreement, 3.warranty of due diligence. (limiting) When you say ‘declarative’ i use the term more common in the philosophy of science ‘promissory’, and when duly diligent ‘testimonial’. So your term ‘declarative’ means opinion, the mainstream considers it promissory, and I consider it testimonial. The difference between these three claims is demand. Language satisfies DEMAND for INFALLIBILITY in the given circumstance. THe market for due diligence increases as externalities to the speech increase. This is demonstrated everywhere in all walks of life. It’s not an opinion it’s the evidence.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1553442870 Timestamp) THE SERIES OF GRAMMARS PSYCHOLOGY (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)

    1. 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)