Curt Doolittle

Theme: Grammar

  • the first phrase is meaningless. what do you intend to say?

    the first phrase is meaningless. what do you intend to say?

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-05 02:38:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1014700037291593728

    Reply addressees: @dagmar_schmitt

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1014627095186554880

    IN REPLY TO:

    @GudistGrug

    @curtdoolittle Legitimate religion delineates truth, and leaves other matters to their appropriate spheres. Brotherhood must come from the struggle together, but the direction of that struggle must come from somewhere.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1014627095186554880

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFE

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFER FROM ARISTOTLE’S – TRADITIONAL PHILOSOPHY

    Note the order, and the pairings.

    1 – Psychology : Acquisitionism(restating psychology as acquisition)
    1 – Aesthetics : Aesthetics (a scientific restatement of aesthetics)

    2 – Metaphysics : Vitruvianism: Man as the Measure (actions determine categories)
    2 – Grammars: Grammars of Measurement (restating language as a set of grammars of continuous recursive measurements.)

    3 – Epistemology : Testimonialism (completing the scientific method and uniting all the sciences)
    3 – Truth : Testimonial Truth (an extension of performative truth)

    4 – Ethics : Propertarianism (an extension of the ethics of property)
    4 – Law : The Natural Law of Reciprocity of Sovereign Men.

    5 – Sociology : Division of Perception, Cognition, Knowledge, Labor, and Advocacy.
    5 – Politics : Markets in Everything, Market Government: Ending Monopoly Production of Commons

    6 -Group Evolutionary Strategies : Those that do and do not converge on Meritocracy, Eugenic Evolution, and Reciprocity.
    6 – War (Competition) : War by all possible means (including post-Westphalian war)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 16:00:20 UTC

  • NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFER FROM ARISTOTLE’S – TRADITIONAL PH

    NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFER FROM ARISTOTLE’S – TRADITIONAL PHILOSOPHY

    Note the order, and the pairings.

    1 – Psychology : Acquisitionism(restating psychology as acquisition)

    1 – Aesthetics : Aesthetics (a scientific restatement of aesthetics)

    2 – Metaphysics : Vitruvianism: Man as the Measure (actions determine categories)

    2 – Grammars: Grammars of Measurement (restating language as a set of grammars of continuous recursive measurements.)

    3 – Epistemology : Testimonialism (completing the scientific method and uniting all the sciences)

    3 – Truth : Testimonial Truth (an extension of performative truth)

    4 – Ethics : Propertarianism (an extension of the ethics of property)

    4 – Law : The Natural Law of Reciprocity of Sovereign Men.

    5 – Sociology : Division of Perception, Cognition, Knowledge, Labor, and Advocacy.

    5 – Politics : Markets in Everything, Market Government: Ending Monopoly Production of Commons

    6 -Group Evolutionary Strategies : Those that do and do not converge on Meritocracy, Eugenic Evolution, and Reciprocity.

    6 – War (Competition) : War by all possible means (including post-Westphalian war)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 12:00:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. Analytic Philosophy One of the nonsense descr

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Analytic Philosophy

    One of the nonsense descriptions of analytic philosophy is that one is required to write in ‘clear’ prose. This is yet another bit of rationalist nonsense.

    —“it is characterized by an emphasis on argumentative clarity and precision, often making use of formal logic, conceptual analysis, and, to a lesser degree, mathematics and the natural sciences.”—

    The analytic philosophy movement (anglo) evolved out of the anglo predisposition for legal prose, the conversion of mathematics from prose to symbols, and the (desperate) desire of philosophy to find a pretense of calling itself a science.

    As far as I know the movement is dead, as have been most philosophical movements. At present, I am not sure much philosophy exists outside of a study of the evolution of math, logic, science, law, politics, and theology.

    So, it’s not that analytic prose must be clearer per se, in the sense that the average idiot should be able to understand it in colloquial prose (we leave that to the left and the europeans) – it’s that it must be constructed out of terms, phrases, and sentences that are logically testable, and free of analogy, the imaginary, and the phenomenal(experiential) – and the undecidable left to scientific investigation.

    Or as I would say it: it must be stated as mathematical, logical, operational, or scientific argument under natural law.

    The problem is that:
    1) While relations are constant in mathematics they are also trivially simple (positional).
    2) There are always more dimensions in a comparison of references than there are constant relations (this is a truism).
    3) Closure does not exist (overplay contradiction)
    ….
    Argh. I don’t want to go through all this again….
    Rationalism is usable only for interpretation of scriptural law. It evolved out of it. (Pilpul and Critique).

    Justified true belief is nonsense. No amount of justification will determine what is true. It is only survival from criticism that determinse a truth candidate, and justification merely explains one of the roads to rome (understanding).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 23:47:15 UTC

  • What’s the Difference Between a Logic and A Grammar?

    (important)(core) There isn’t any. 

    Logic...>...Grammar....>....Speech.........>...Story

    Is the same as: 

    Law.....>...Theory........>....Hypothesis...>...Observation

    Grammar: Rules of continuous disambiguation producing a well formed statement functioning as a series of transactions in a contract for meaning. Any person who has spent enough time with complex databases has made the ironic assertion that everything in the universe can be Normalized down to ones and zeroes. Fewer of us recognize that this is very close to the structure of the human nervous system.

  • What’s the Difference Between a Logic and A Grammar?

    (important)(core) There isn’t any. 

    Logic...>...Grammar....>....Speech.........>...Story

    Is the same as: 

    Law.....>...Theory........>....Hypothesis...>...Observation

    Grammar: Rules of continuous disambiguation producing a well formed statement functioning as a series of transactions in a contract for meaning. Any person who has spent enough time with complex databases has made the ironic assertion that everything in the universe can be Normalized down to ones and zeroes. Fewer of us recognize that this is very close to the structure of the human nervous system.

  • Analytic Philosophy One of the nonsense descriptions of analytic philosophy is t

    Analytic Philosophy

    One of the nonsense descriptions of analytic philosophy is that one is required to write in ‘clear’ prose. This is yet another bit of rationalist nonsense.

    —“it is characterized by an emphasis on argumentative clarity and precision, often making use of formal logic, conceptual analysis, and, to a lesser degree, mathematics and the natural sciences.”—

    The analytic philosophy movement (anglo) evolved out of the anglo predisposition for legal prose, the conversion of mathematics from prose to symbols, and the (desperate) desire of philosophy to find a pretense of calling itself a science.

    As far as I know the movement is dead, as have been most philosophical movements. At present, I am not sure much philosophy exists outside of a study of the evolution of math, logic, science, law, politics, and theology.

    So, it’s not that analytic prose must be clearer per se, in the sense that the average idiot should be able to understand it in colloquial prose (we leave that to the left and the europeans) – it’s that it must be constructed out of terms, phrases, and sentences that are logically testable, and free of analogy, the imaginary, and the phenomenal(experiential) – and the undecidable left to scientific investigation.

    Or as I would say it: it must be stated as mathematical, logical, operational, or scientific argument under natural law.

    The problem is that:

    1) While relations are constant in mathematics they are also trivially simple (positional).

    2) There are always more dimensions in a comparison of references than there are constant relations (this is a truism).

    3) Closure does not exist (overplay contradiction)

    ….

    Argh. I don’t want to go through all this again….

    Rationalism is usable only for interpretation of scriptural law. It evolved out of it. (Pilpul and Critique).

    Justified true belief is nonsense. No amount of justification will determine what is true. It is only survival from criticism that determinse a truth candidate, and justification merely explains one of the roads to rome (understanding).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 19:47:00 UTC

  • *Always Use Series*.

    Tip that some people get and some people fail to get: *Always Use Series*. —“mythology, values, rituals, signals, institutions, language, culture, and kinship”— —“ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit”— —“murder, violence, theft, fraud, free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of the commons, conspiracy, statism, conversion, immigration, conquest”— —“Idealism, abrahamism, pilpul vs critique, sophism, justificaitonary rationalism, propaganda”— —“Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Rousseauianism, Kantianism, Marxism, Keynesianism, Frankfurt School, Feminism, Postmodernism, Outright Lying”—- —” logic, math, accounting, algorithms, recipes(protocols), science (operations), testimony, written prose, ordinary language, idiomatic speech, storytelling, fiction, fictionalisms, deceits”— —“Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Natural Law and Markets in Everything”— Each of these series contains all the information necessary to construct very complex arguments. and the virtue of repeating them, and any other series of definitions, is that it is extremely hard to play word games when all words as such are subject to competition in each such series.

  • *Always Use Series*.

    Tip that some people get and some people fail to get: *Always Use Series*. —“mythology, values, rituals, signals, institutions, language, culture, and kinship”— —“ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit”— —“murder, violence, theft, fraud, free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of the commons, conspiracy, statism, conversion, immigration, conquest”— —“Idealism, abrahamism, pilpul vs critique, sophism, justificaitonary rationalism, propaganda”— —“Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Rousseauianism, Kantianism, Marxism, Keynesianism, Frankfurt School, Feminism, Postmodernism, Outright Lying”—- —” logic, math, accounting, algorithms, recipes(protocols), science (operations), testimony, written prose, ordinary language, idiomatic speech, storytelling, fiction, fictionalisms, deceits”— —“Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Truth, Duty, Natural Law and Markets in Everything”— Each of these series contains all the information necessary to construct very complex arguments. and the virtue of repeating them, and any other series of definitions, is that it is extremely hard to play word games when all words as such are subject to competition in each such series.

  • “Ball as in ‘sphere’ comes from Norse ‘bǫllr’ /bɔlːr/, while ball as in ‘dance p

    —“Ball as in ‘sphere’ comes from Norse ‘bǫllr’ /bɔlːr/, while ball as in ‘dance party’ comes from Latin ‘ballare’, which in turn became ‘bal’ (French for ‘a dance’). Totally different roots, it’s just one of those quirks of English having absorbed bits of so many different languages.”—