Theme: Grammar

  • Words are analogous to functions that produce experiences, not actions in realit

    Words are analogous to functions that produce experiences, not actions in reality.

    What is the difference between words and deeds?

    Well, when we are talking about the imperceptible, one thing – analogies.

    But if we are talking bout the perceptible and actionable, something else.

    You can act. You can understand the actions of others.

    You can only analogistically empathize with the material universe – especially at small or large scale: beyond human scale.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-25 11:29:00 UTC

  • MADE MY DAY – SOMEONE GETS IT. —“Propertarian language is GENIUS for explainin

    MADE MY DAY – SOMEONE GETS IT.

    —“Propertarian language is GENIUS for explaining the world….shit, you gave me the language to concoct a grand unified theory of everything …AND IT WORKS”—

    My life is complete.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-24 05:09:00 UTC

  • In math the difference between exploration (theorizing) by operations, and proof

    In math the difference between exploration (theorizing) by operations, and proof, is narrow. But in argument the difference between exploration using operations on meaning (models) which we call ‘reason’, and operations in reality (those that are existentially possible) ‘actions’, can diverge greatly. For the same reasons that mathematicians call functions numbers – aggregates of operations are easier to work with than many discreet operations….


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-22 06:43:00 UTC

  • PROPERTY, EXCHANGE, CONSTRUCTION, GRAMMAR, RHETORIC, TESIMONY, PROMISE. The skil

    PROPERTY, EXCHANGE, CONSTRUCTION, GRAMMAR, RHETORIC, TESIMONY, PROMISE.

    The skills. It is these skills that defeat the lies and liars.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-22 06:37:00 UTC

  • Truth is not found in words, but in actions. We do not need language to demonstr

    Truth is not found in words, but in actions. We do not need language to demonstrate truths. In fact, it is hard to imagine that language has any positive meaning other than to provide us with inexpensive models to problem solve with. Unfortunately, while providing us with discount modeling, it also serves as an outstanding means of also obtaining discounts by means of deception.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-22 03:51:00 UTC

  • The Mises Institute’s Cult Of Language

    [T]he way the Jewish people held sway over their members, is the same way that all religious cults hold sway: there are mandatory beliefs, mandatory language, and mandatory rituals that one must follow or be ostracized. And as long as the benefits of the group are sufficient that threat of ostracization provides incentive to hold to those norms, then people do so out of purely utilitarian choice.

    Rallying and Shaming of the Feminists and Socialists works by the same means: neo-puritan and postmodern language demands verbal, belief, and ritualistic conformity or they will rally, shame, and attempt to ostracize you.
    Ludwig von Mises attempts to create an equally mandatory pseudoscience of praxeology in order to demand compliance of members. Rothbard expanded Mises’ approach and this approach was a failure until Rockwell and Tucker use the new medium of the web to compete with the old media. And for a short while, it worked.

    However, science and truth telling have won the day and the world now speaks in science – leaving mises verbal cult adrift and associated with the lunatic fringe.

    And even worse, the world has been systematically abandoning philosophy as a cult language for more than half a century. And its important that the world does so, because philosophy was the ruse under which these systems of lies were constructed and propagated.

    That is simply because science corresponds more accurately with reality than does any other form of language – because scientists have the least perverse incentives than anyone other than mathematicians. And even mathematicians still engage in fanciful platonism – moreso than do scientists.

    So what use is philosophy? Prior to propertarianism, cognitive science and experimental psychology, I think it was necessary for debating moral discourse. But at present, as far as I can see, it is merely a primitive system of measurement limited to human scale. Perhaps, better stated, it is the means by which we attempt to construct theories such that we may test them, refine them, and state them operationally.


    In that sense, philosophy, is merely a looser member of the logics, and a subset of science, which in turn is a subset of truth telling.

  • The Mises Institute’s Cult Of Language

    [T]he way the Jewish people held sway over their members, is the same way that all religious cults hold sway: there are mandatory beliefs, mandatory language, and mandatory rituals that one must follow or be ostracized. And as long as the benefits of the group are sufficient that threat of ostracization provides incentive to hold to those norms, then people do so out of purely utilitarian choice.

    Rallying and Shaming of the Feminists and Socialists works by the same means: neo-puritan and postmodern language demands verbal, belief, and ritualistic conformity or they will rally, shame, and attempt to ostracize you.
    Ludwig von Mises attempts to create an equally mandatory pseudoscience of praxeology in order to demand compliance of members. Rothbard expanded Mises’ approach and this approach was a failure until Rockwell and Tucker use the new medium of the web to compete with the old media. And for a short while, it worked.

    However, science and truth telling have won the day and the world now speaks in science – leaving mises verbal cult adrift and associated with the lunatic fringe.

    And even worse, the world has been systematically abandoning philosophy as a cult language for more than half a century. And its important that the world does so, because philosophy was the ruse under which these systems of lies were constructed and propagated.

    That is simply because science corresponds more accurately with reality than does any other form of language – because scientists have the least perverse incentives than anyone other than mathematicians. And even mathematicians still engage in fanciful platonism – moreso than do scientists.

    So what use is philosophy? Prior to propertarianism, cognitive science and experimental psychology, I think it was necessary for debating moral discourse. But at present, as far as I can see, it is merely a primitive system of measurement limited to human scale. Perhaps, better stated, it is the means by which we attempt to construct theories such that we may test them, refine them, and state them operationally.


    In that sense, philosophy, is merely a looser member of the logics, and a subset of science, which in turn is a subset of truth telling.

  • ALL LIFE IS POLITICS – ONCE AGAIN Action(correspondence). Precision(Parsimony).

    ALL LIFE IS POLITICS – ONCE AGAIN

    Action(correspondence). Precision(Parsimony). Meaning(Recursion)

    How do I relate these ideas to one another? Meaning allows us to restructure – to reorganize. So meaning is just theorizing with the operations (ideas) at our disposal.

    Why are the hermeneuticists so fascinated with meaning instead of truth? oh… it’s cheap.

    Wait… so, meaning to the individual isn’t important. Meaning is a political utility.

    So why is meaning….. oh… persuasion for the purpose of cooperation (and less positive ambitions) as well.

    So is it really… yes, so Popper’s advice is directional.. on the conduct of investigation, but not on truth… yes. Ok. So I am full circle again.

    SCIENCE (AND CRITICAL RATIONALISM) ARE SUBSET OF TRUTH TELLING not a superset.

    So just as mathematicians practice platonism out of convenience, scientists practice it out of convenience, philosophers practice it out of convenience.

    But then LAW IS THE HIGHEST LOGIC and testimony the only existential truth, and all else is merely a subset of the truth telling – using analogies. Analogies that lead us to confusion.

    ALL LIFE IS POLITICS

    FUK. THATS IT.

    ( Frank Lovell , Ayelam Valentine Agaliba )


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-22 00:45:00 UTC

  • THE MISES INSTITUTE’S CULT OF LANGUAGE The way the Jewish people held sway over

    THE MISES INSTITUTE’S CULT OF LANGUAGE

    The way the Jewish people held sway over their members, is the same way that all religious cults hold sway: there are mandatory beliefs, mandatory language, and mandatory rituals that one must follow or be ostracized. And as long as the benefits of the group are sufficient that threat of ostracization provides incentive to hold to those norms, then people do so out of purely utilitarian choice.

    Rallying and Shaming of the Feminists and Socialists works by the same means: neo-puritan and postmodern language demands verbal, belief, and ritualistic conformity or they will rally, shame, and attempt to ostracize you.

    Ludwig von Mises attempts to create an equally mandatory pseudoscience of praxeology in order to demand compliance of members. Rothbard expanded Mises’ approach and this approach was a failure until Rockwell and Tucker use the new medium of the web to compete with the old media. And for a short while, it worked.

    However, science and truth telling have won the day and the world now speaks in science – leaving mises verbal cult adrift and associated with the lunatic fringe.

    And even worse, the world has been systematically abandoning philosophy as a cult language for more than half a century. And its important that the world does so, because philosophy was the ruse under which these systems of lies were constructed and propagated.

    That is simply because science corresponds more accurately with reality than does any other form of language – because scientists have the least perverse incentives than anyone other than mathematicians. And even mathematicians still engage in fanciful platonism – moreso than do scientists.

    So what use is philosophy? Prior to propertarianism, cognitive science and experimental psychology, I think it was necessary for debating moral discourse. But at present, as far as I can see, it is merely a primitive system of measurement limited to human scale. Perhaps, better stated, it is the means by which we attempt to construct theories such that we may test them, refine them, and state them operationally.

    In that sense, philosophy, is merely a looser member of the logics, and a subset of science, which in turn is a subset of truth telling.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-21 21:52:00 UTC

  • Well, there are many things that we CAN say, that are not false, and provide us

    Well, there are many things that we CAN say, that are not false, and provide us meaning. While there are other things that we must say and are truthful.

    How do I do a better job of demarcating meaning and truth? Because that is what I am after.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-21 19:54:00 UTC