Theme: Grammar

  • GENERATIONS AND THE ERAS OF FRAUD E-Prime = Testimony of My Knowledge (Science=T

    GENERATIONS AND THE ERAS OF FRAUD

    E-Prime = Testimony of My Knowledge (Science=Testimony)

    Medieval Thought = Supernatural knowledge

    Greco/Roman Thought = Supernormal Knowledge

    Germanic Languages = Testimonial (descriptive).

    (Germanic=Scandinavian, Germanic, Celtic, Italic)

    (Italic(present) = Romance (latin) languages.)

    Aristotle RESTORED naturalist thought.

    Bacon et all RESTORED naturalist thought.

    The Operationalists RESTORED naturalist thought.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-01 09:56:00 UTC

  • “Q: Curtus Maximus. I want to learn more about this. Any suggestions as to where

    —“Q: Curtus Maximus. I want to learn more about this. Any suggestions as to where to start?”—Dominic DeLuca

    By Curtus Maxiumus

    A: This website gives a nice explanation of e-prime. Start with trying to write in E-Prime.

    My list of disallowed and allowed words:

    DISALLOWED WORDS

    be; being; been; am; is; isn’t; are; aren’t; was; wasn’t; were; weren’t;

    Contractions formed from a pronoun and a form of to be:

    I’m; you’re; we’re; they’re; he’s; she’s; it’s; there’s; here’s; where’s; how’s; what’s; who’s; that’s;

    ALLOWED WORDS

    The following words, do not derive from forms of to be. Some of these serve similar grammatical functions (see auxiliary verbs).

    become; has; have; having; had (I’ve; you’ve); do; does; doing; did; can; could; will; would (they’d); shall; should; ought; may; might; must; remain; equal.

    https://www.nobeliefs.com/eprime.htm

    NOBELIEFS.COM http://NOBELIEFS.COM

    ( Maximus: FYI: I also prohibit ‘become’ )


    Source date (UTC): 2019-02-01 09:04:00 UTC

  • Bill Joslin IMO korzybski devised a way to enact an essentially relativistic and

    Bill Joslin

    IMO korzybski devised a way to enact an essentially relativistic and nihilists position.

    The brilliance of this tool, again IMO , was grounding e-prime into a standard criteria i.e. operationalism. By doing so it closes the door to the relativistic, nihilistic uses.

    Further to that, e-prime strongly couples our speech and thought to the operational criteria. But if left at this alone, I think it would suffer the same flaws as logical positivism…

    By expanding the criteria into multiple dimensions, we don’t reduce our warrant (speech and thought) to overly restrictive limitations (i.e. cherry picking, erroneous or undue dismissiveness.)

    The last component , acknowledging truth as an approximation (as per Curt’s view) prevents us from undue certainty and dogmatically held assertions of “truth”.

    So

    – E-prime eliminates unfounded assertions

    – Operationalism eliminates relativistic nihilistic application

    – Expanded operationalism (testimonial criteria) eliminates myopic limitations (undue dismissiveness)

    – And provisional truth theories eliminate dogmatic assertions of certainty.

    – The first contributor did the light lifting – nothing really

    – The second (Bridgeman) cross the major threshold

    – Curt and his community (assuming other contributed – Curzon etc) the the heavy lifting


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-31 22:19:00 UTC

  • IF YOU PRACTICE EPRIME ALONE YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE WHAT IT WILL DO FOR YOUR REASO

    IF YOU PRACTICE EPRIME ALONE YOU WILL NOT BELIEVE WHAT IT WILL DO FOR YOUR REASONING OVER TIME.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-31 16:03:00 UTC

  • It is true that we are often limited in ‘meaning’ to methods of reasoning, calcu

    It is true that we are often limited in ‘meaning’ to methods of reasoning, calculation, and computation by the grammar and vocabulary available to use, but that free association prevails regardless. Language markets continue unabated.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-31 02:28:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090798979409985537

    Reply addressees: @LJ_Berkmann @TrueDilTom

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090787975510671360


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090787975510671360

  • Thank you for the compliment. Not that it affects the argument. Evidence of all

    Thank you for the compliment. Not that it affects the argument. Evidence of all language is that it competes in markets and as such was only slightly weakened by (a)the standardization of spelling during printing, and (b)the development of science as universal language of truth.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-31 02:26:36 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090798474310963205

    Reply addressees: @LJ_Berkmann @TrueDilTom

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090787975510671360


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1090787975510671360

  • “Searching for a fancier refutation, but I’ll just cop out and say you’re just t

    —“Searching for a fancier refutation, but I’ll just cop out and say you’re just too Anglo in your thinking.”—

    Thank you for the compliment. Not that it affects the argument. 😉

    Evidence of all language is that it competes in markets and as such was only slightly weakened by (a)the standardization of spelling during printing, and (b)the development of science as universal language of truth.

    It is true that we are often limited in ‘meaning’ to methods of reasoning, calculation, and computation by the grammar and vocabulary available to use, but that free association prevails regardless. Language markets continue unabated.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-30 21:41:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/51133950_10156949625707264_127328203

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/51133950_10156949625707264_127328203

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_SxeO6JU-xg/51133950_10156949625707264_1273282031727411200_n_10156949625697264.jpg Nick DahlheimDamn, Bill Joslin is the King of radical disambiguationJan 29, 2019, 11:14 PMOsman KuğudağI read a statement that the Celts could not defeat the Romans until they adopted some of the Roman ways. If that is true, is it really that bad to learn from your enemy if it makes you superior?Jan 30, 2019, 3:42 AMAdam DavidThat quote is a really good condensed explanation for the tactics used by the right. At least since i’ve become politically aware. It takes a real understanding to condense information like that.Jan 30, 2019, 3:43 AMChristopher HallPlease don’t tell me propertarianism is horse shoe theory posting about tactics. Confounding tactics with intent is childish. Projecting force and inflicting loss on the enemy is how victory is achieved, there are just scales of how force is used.Jan 30, 2019, 9:06 AMCurt DoolittleWTF does that mean? Horseshoe theory suggests far right and far left are similar (authoritarian). I don’t make that argument at all. I make the argument rule of law and necessary truth, vs rule by discretion and necessary lies. And that right intolerance is eugenic, and left intolerance dysgenic. The fact that the far right has adopted the tactics of the marxist and postmodernists is simply a function of the evidence. The only answer is the organized application of violence to impose, under rule of law, our traditional order.Jan 30, 2019, 9:12 AMChristopher HallAnd I agree with how that force should be used to impose those virtues and rules. We are learning what tools we can put in our bag right now and how we can use them asymmetrically. The left has been doing this far longer so yes, the right is learning from their enemies. If you don’t know how, copy them

    Imposing rule of law and traditional order is, I would say, not in the cards right now and the force needed to impose order is an escalation we don’t have the total means of yet. At this stage agitation and other means are being used to build and counter the narrative. Many of these tactics have originated from the left in the modern sense, but a new type of hammer is still just a hammer.

    As far as the mix up is concerned, I read the first sentence as a premise for the rest which is how it flows, however previous conversations with normie types take immense issue with acting “principled” and not using any tactics to insure their own victory. The tactics we know how to use are the ones that have “immediate time horizons” and our tool bag doesn’t have many others that are long time horizons. Those that we use include networking, training and content creation for the most part.

    No offense meant Mr. Dootlittle, just don’t want to see the same moral pitfalls.Jan 30, 2019, 9:29 AMCurt Doolittleso you agree with bill then….Jan 30, 2019, 9:37 AMChristopher HallFor the most part, except I don’t agree with using another one’s means to achieve their ends as compromising our goals. Necessity dictates immediate response sometimes and if you can’t reply with a better means you use what’s available. When faced with doxing, dox the guy doing it. Censorship from big tech, boycott. Etc.

    Another big step for our side would be making our own tools for our own tool bag to achieve our ends.Jan 30, 2019, 9:43 AMBenjamin IrelandThis is basically what I was alluding to yesterday about conservatives talking out of both sides of their mouths regarding the Civil War. The truth is already on our side. We don’t need to be intellectually dishonest in order to win debates. Acquire the truth, and help spread it.Jan 30, 2019, 11:56 AMDylan KnowlesThe argument that the right hasnt been doing it right and needs to learn from the Enemy because they evolve rapidly is outright wrong. The right has known for hundreds of years how to remove enemies. The issue isnt the application of force or the tactics involved. Its the balls to act in the correct way. We suffer from either inaction or over action. People who want to sit around all day and hash and rehash and do nothing or people who lash out in all directions and only accomplish getting their name on a federal watchlist and local police radars. Utilizing left wing tactics doesnt give us any ground, it only dilutes any attempts at meaningful change.Jan 30, 2019, 6:28 PMCurt Doolittle^Failure to act as a group.Jan 30, 2019, 6:34 PMDylan KnowlesCurt Doolittle Id even go so far as to say most of these new “Right Groups” and the alt right are making learned mistakes. But god forbid you point out inaccuracies because then its “Punching Right”.Jan 30, 2019, 6:35 PMStephen ThomasThe only real method to defeat the left is to utterly (violently) destroy them. Our tolerance is their greatest ally.

    Skull PileJan 30, 2019, 6:52 PMNick Dahlheim100 millionJan 30, 2019, 6:54 PMPat RyanThe left doesn’t own monopoly on certain kinds of tactics. They just rely on them heavily.

    If an enemy charged at me with an axe, and they kept using that axe over and over again, I could say, “Those damn axes are overpowered, nerf plz”, or I could look at the axe as a weakness, study it, use it, and figure out the weakpoint.

    Spearman and swordsmen and salesmen bicker about means. It’s best to be victorymen.Jan 30, 2019, 8:07 PMDylan KnowlesTheres a difference, lets say for purpose of thought the left wing are using axes. But you own a gun. Instead of using the gun you own you think to yourself “Man, maybe I should get a axe if all these people are using them.” When you already have the means to solve the problem you dont adapt to the enemies tactics, you remove the enemy. Point blank. If I get stranded on an island of a lost tribe and I have my gun, and my 30 round magazine. And they are using bows and arrows or throwing spears at me. Im not gonna sling my weapon and pick up a spear and go toe to toe with a dozen members of the lost tribe. Im gonna flick off my safety and remove the problem. And in all reality, thats about the equivalent of our situation. The only issue we have is too many people want to pick up the proverbial spear and fight the tribe head on when we already have solutions that far outweigh the enemies means to overpower us.Jan 30, 2019, 8:12 PMChris CantrellI agree, but I am also learning that the truth is not enough. This is a reply I got for spreading truth last week…

    “No, what you are is one of these people who fishes for people to give you all kinds of “arguments” and “proof” just to wear us out. There is even a specific term for it.

    It is plain as day that Trump and his supporters are racist, that these “kids” are racist, and YOU are in denial.

    Good day, sir.”Jan 31, 2019, 6:56 AMBenjamin IrelandChris Cantrell yeah, those kind of people depress the hell out of me.Jan 31, 2019, 10:46 AMCurt DoolittleWrong Logic Chris.

    Truth is an excuse for moral men to prosecute (or punish or eliminate) those who engage in genocide, fraud and deceit.

    It is not a means of convincing those who are immoral.

    There is only one means of persuasion: the organize application of violence to deny other than truth the opportunity to survive.Jan 31, 2019, 10:50 AMDan WarrenReason for the reasonable, violence for the rest.Feb 1, 2019, 11:13 AM


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-29 23:10:00 UTC

  • You see, when machines communicate they can say ‘context change’. (meaning, new

    You see, when machines communicate they can say ‘context change’. (meaning, new model to narrate). We do it with tone and inference – if we have good manners. Some people don’t inform you as to subject change. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-26 23:02:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1089297509137240066

  • You see, when machines communicate they can say ‘context change’. (meaning, new

    You see, when machines communicate they can say ‘context change’. (meaning, new model to narrate). We do it with tone and inference – if we have good manners. Some people don’t inform you as to subject change. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2019-01-26 18:02:00 UTC