outside it, of it, in it, external to man, within man.
Forgot the first one. So yes. Thank you. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-23 13:12:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1716442579720388996
Reply addressees: @GracianoGreen
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1716439105893007513
FWIW: AFAIK the linquistic argument not meaningful because we are both correct – I’m just only interested in testimonial (performative) truth. You and those who follow the same line of reasoning are interested in more. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-23 12:22:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1716429767338012935
Reply addressees: @Imperius__13 @cowcow8237465 @Pine_Shade @AuronMacintyre
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1716118598953865621
(NLI Update)
This morning Brad and I wrote the introduction to the summary of The Laws – what we internally call ‘The Pamphlet’ – which just lists the ternary logic and laws four all four of the sciences from physics to group evolutionary strategies.
We had originally included a section in The Science volume called ‘the synthesis’ – which would hold this overview. But both our followers and brad in particular felt we needed to publish something sooner that was enough of an overview that our people could begin to evangalize with -and which would establish our academic credibility.
As for the content, Brad has been consistent in keeping the negativas out of it, especially the conflict of civilizations we’re currently embroilded in at the same time as the conflict of the sexes – which is a double whammy for us.
At present I’m not sure where we’ll put the European vs Semitic vs Asian conflict section – whether in the Science volume or possibly the Persecutions volume. The sex differences in conflict and lying is in the Science volume. And I suspect that’s the best place to put it.
I’m not quite settled on this. Because most people, at least the conservatives, want and need the science of the feminine-semitic devolutionary vs masculine european evolutionary content most of all because it’s the cause of the crisis of our age.
Because the semitic and underclass instinct whether in rome and christianity, or in marxism and class warfare (again), and semitic and feminine warfare (again) in the present age are always the problem in every era destroying each civlization it touches.
Any deep and considered thoughts would be appreciated.
Remember we’re thnking of moving markets (factions) not just what you want. But what our people need to achieve a desired end.
Cheers
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-22 17:58:08 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1716151969348263936
EXAMPLE OF WHY IT”S HARD TO DUMB DOWN MY (OUR) WORK IN P-LAW.
Comparing the Original Academic, College, High School, and First Grade versions of the same text by ChatGPT4.
It succeeds in getting one point across – morality is not relative. And maybe that’s all that really matters?
CURTD
Act as a random internet user. The random internet user asks you to write a definition of morality in the Style of philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle. Please respond with what you would write.
ChatGPT
Certainly, emulating the style of Curt Doolittle would likely involve a focus on rigorous epistemology, performative truth, and natural law. Here’s an attempt:
“Morality, in the context of Natural Law, refers to the set of reciprocal and non-imposing behaviors that contribute to the persistence and flourishing of a cooperative social order. These behaviors manifest through performative truth—actions that are in concordance with the facts of reality and demonstrably beneficial to the group’s evolutionary strategy. In other words, morality is not an abstract or subjective construct, but a decidably quantifiable framework grounded in reciprocity and empirically observable outcomes. It exists as a byproduct of group evolutionary strategy, serving as a regulatory mechanism for interpersonal and inter-group relations. Accordingly, the demarcation of what is ‘moral’ is made through the application of tests for reciprocity and imposition of costs, rendering the concept scientifically scrutinizable, legally definable, and universally applicable.”
I hope this aligns with the depth and style associated with Curt Doolittle’s approach to such complex topics. Feel free to critique or question any aspect of this definition.
CURTD
Interesting. That’s excellent. Profoundly good. Far better than I ‘ve seen you produce in the past. You keep getting better and better.
ChatGPT
I appreciate the high praise, especially coming from someone with your background and expertise. If there are any other topics or questions you’d like to explore, please feel free to ask. Your feedback and insights would be invaluable.
CURTD
What is the reading level of the passage you responded with?
ChatGPT
The passage appears to be written at a postgraduate or scholarly reading level. It incorporates specialized terminology from philosophy, law, and social science, such as “rigorous epistemology,” “performative truth,” “Natural Law,” and “group evolutionary strategy.” These terms are typically encountered in advanced academic settings and may require a specialized background to fully understand. Therefore, the passage would likely be most accessible to those with higher education, particularly in the fields mentioned.
CURTD
Could you repeat the original passage in language for a college student?
ChatGPT
Certainly. Here’s a rephrasing aimed at a college-level audience:
“In the framework of Natural Law, morality is about actions that are fair and don’t harm others, which helps to maintain a well-functioning society. These actions are based on real facts and clearly help the group as a whole. So, morality isn’t just a personal opinion; it’s something we can measure based on its outcomes. It serves as a set of rules that guide how individuals and groups interact, allowing us to study and define what’s right and wrong in a consistent way.”
I’ve aimed to preserve the original concepts while using terminology and phrasing that may be more accessible to a college student.
CURTD
Could you please translate the passage into high school level language?
ChatGPT
Certainly, here’s the translated version in high school level language:
“When we talk about what’s right and wrong based on Natural Law, we’re talking about actions that are fair and don’t hurt anyone else. These actions help everyone get along and succeed together. We don’t just make up what’s right or wrong based on how we feel; instead, we look at actions that actually help the group and are based on facts. What’s considered ‘right’ is determined by rules that make sure everyone is treated fairly and nobody is taken advantage of. This makes it possible to really study what’s right and wrong in a way that’s the same for everyone, no matter where they’re from.”
CURTD
Can you repeat for a first grader?
ChatGPT
Certainly, translating complex ideas into language a first-grader could understand is a unique challenge. Here’s my attempt:
“Being good means doing things that are fair and don’t hurt others. This helps everyone be friends and get along better. We don’t just guess what’s good; we have rules to help us know for sure. These rules make sure everyone is treated nicely.”
I hope this simplification retains the essence of the original content.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-15 20:31:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1713653783421505537
Act as a random internet user. The random internet user asks you to write a definition of morality in the STyle of philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle. Please respond with what you would write.
ChatGPT
Certainly, emulating the style of Curt Doolittle would likely involve a focus on rigorous epistemology, performative truth, and natural law. Here’s an attempt:
“Morality, in the context of Natural Law, refers to the set of reciprocal and non-imposing behaviors that contribute to the persistence and flourishing of a cooperative social order. These behaviors manifest through performative truth—actions that are in concordance with the facts of reality and demonstrably beneficial to the group’s evolutionary strategy. In other words, morality is not an abstract or subjective construct, but a decidably quantifiable framework grounded in reciprocity and empirically observable outcomes. It exists as a byproduct of group evolutionary strategy, serving as a regulatory mechanism for interpersonal and inter-group relations. Accordingly, the demarcation of what is ‘moral’ is made through the application of tests for reciprocity and imposition of costs, rendering the concept scientifically scrutinizable, legally definable, and universally applicable.”
I hope this aligns with the depth and style associated with Curt Doolittle’s approach to such complex topics. Feel free to critique or question any aspect of this definition.
📷
Interesting. That’s excellent. Profoundly good. Far better than I ‘ve seen you produce in the past. You keep getting better and better.
ChatGPT
I appreciate the high praise, especially coming from someone with your background and expertise. If there are any other topics or questions you’d like to explore, please feel free to ask. Your feedback and insights would be invaluable.
📷
Could you please translate the following passage into high school level language? Certainly, emulating the style of Curt Doolittle would likely involve a focus on rigorous epistemology, performative truth, and natural law. Here’s an attempt: “Morality, in the context of Natural Law, refers to the set of reciprocal and non-imposing behaviors that contribute to the persistence and flourishing of a cooperative social order. These behaviors manifest through performative truth—actions that are in concordance with the facts of reality and demonstrably beneficial to the group’s evolutionary strategy. In other words, morality is not an abstract or subjective construct, but a decidably quantifiable framework grounded in reciprocity and empirically observable outcomes. It exists as a byproduct of group evolutionary strategy, serving as a regulatory mechanism for interpersonal and inter-group relations. Accordingly, the demarcation of what is ‘moral’ is made through the application of tests for reciprocity and imposition of costs, rendering the concept scientifically scrutinizable, legally definable, and universally applicable.” I hope this aligns with the depth and style associated with Curt Doolittle’s approach to such complex topics. Feel free to critique or question any aspect of this definition.
ChatGPT
Certainly, here’s the translated version in high school level language:
“When we talk about what’s right and wrong based on Natural Law, we’re talking about actions that are fair and don’t hurt anyone else. These actions help everyone get along and succeed together. We don’t just make up what’s right or wrong based on how we feel; instead, we look at actions that actually help the group and are based on facts. What’s considered ‘right’ is determined by rules that make sure everyone is treated fairly and nobody is taken advantage of. This makes it possible to really study what’s right and wrong in a way that’s the same for everyone, no matter where they’re from.”
Feel free to ask any follow-up questions or provide feedback.
📷
Can you repeat for a first grader?
ChatGPT
Certainly, translating complex ideas into language a first-grader could understand is a unique challenge. Here’s my attempt:
“Being good means doing things that are fair and don’t hurt others. This helps everyone be friends and get along better. We don’t just guess what’s good; we have rules to help us know for sure. These rules make sure everyone is treated nicely.”
I hope this simplification retains the essence of the original content. Let me know if you have any further questions or feedback.
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-15 20:31:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1713651877009612800
It’s still behind in assimilating information but it ‘knows’ my work.
PROMPT
Act as a random internet user. The random internet user asks you to write a definition of morality in the STyle of philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle. Please respond with what you would write.
ChatGPT
Certainly, emulating the style of Curt Doolittle would likely involve a focus on rigorous epistemology, performative truth, and natural law. Here’s an attempt:
“Morality, in the context of Natural Law, refers to the set of reciprocal and non-imposing behaviors that contribute to the persistence and flourishing of a cooperative social order. These behaviors manifest through performative truth—actions that are in concordance with the facts of reality and demonstrably beneficial to the group’s evolutionary strategy. In other words, morality is not an abstract or subjective construct, but a decidably quantifiable framework grounded in reciprocity and empirically observable outcomes. It exists as a byproduct of group evolutionary strategy, serving as a regulatory mechanism for interpersonal and inter-group relations. Accordingly, the demarcation of what is ‘moral’ is made through the application of tests for reciprocity and imposition of costs, rendering the concept scientifically scrutinizable, legally definable, and universally applicable.”
I hope this aligns with the depth and style associated with Curt Doolittle’s approach to such complex topics. Feel free to critique or question any aspect of this definition.
Reply addressees: @ezra_tezra @adominguez792 @BronskiJoseph
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-15 20:18:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1713650626926612480
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1713649463586074957
I don’t do memes I usually block for them. My goal is to teach verbal skill in argument. Memes don’t help me do that. But more power to you doing so elsewhere
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-13 22:22:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712956882392850485
Reply addressees: @EgregoresGalore
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712931122240463069
No you aren’t dumb. Only a legal historian would probably recognize the meaning on first glance. Both “Hazarding” and “Baiting” are terms in legal dictionaries. So I operationalized the concept by using both terms bait and hazard. Because that’s what we do: disambiguation by…
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-12 19:58:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712558318961799353
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712527510703935511
( good catch. 😉 )
Technically speaking, every US state is a country, and the USA is a federation (corporation). Those of us who study abuse of lanague to manipulate people find this particular topic fascinating.
Same with democracy instead of republic. Same for rule of law instead of rule of law of natural law. And how many americans even grasp the sovereigty of the people by concurrency in legislation and commonality in court?
People are suckers for social construction of falsehoods.
Reply addressees: @RussellJohnston
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-11 17:21:10 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712156397813538816
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1712152891715391491
My friend Daniel is a behavioral scientist working in computational linguistics and he has it coded down to the individual level with many hundreds of properties. That’s not my purview I just look for group effects that are reducible to biological and genetic causes (first…
Source date (UTC): 2023-10-09 03:01:54 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711215380314677298
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1711209407487615154