talking
catching feels
situationship
in a relationship
Sigh…
Postmodern language intruding into the courtship progression
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-08 01:02:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1623125194905731073
talking
catching feels
situationship
in a relationship
Sigh…
Postmodern language intruding into the courtship progression
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-08 01:02:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1623125194905731073
What separates a fictionalism, a fiction and a narrative?
A fictionalism is consistent (magic->pseudoscience, sophistry->idealism(philosophy), occult->theology) IOW male systematizing (consistency) but on false premises. A narrative is just an explanation of observed events.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-07 15:15:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622977270347444226
Each differs by what dimensions are permissible or required. ex, occult, supernatural, supernormal, normal.
A fictionalism is consistent (magic->pseudoscience, sophistry->idealism(philosophy), occult->theology) IOW male systematizing (consistency) but on false premises.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-07 15:12:25 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622976582687096833
Reply addressees: @GracianoGreen
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622959845090500608
Mathematics may be the most advanced langauge we can use while still preserving the capacity to disambiguate what we say in it. Beyond that grammar, that’s limited to what we can hold in working memory with its assistance, the use of vectors and weights surpass our abilities.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-07 15:02:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622974094907170816
Justification is nonsense and must be -the first principle of the universe, and language as a evolution within it, and usable to describe it, consists of continuous recursive disambiguation. Logic eliminate alternatives. It doesn’t prove anything. Proofs are tests of consistency.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-07 14:57:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622972878395428865
Reply addressees: @juicedavisx @TheAutistocrat @InternetRadical @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622911727112454144
(The irony of accusing the guy who solves the scientific method, testimony, reciprocity, universal commensurability, the grammars that result, and a dozen other hard problems, of lacking epistemic rigor)
All logic is falsificationary and forever must be.
Justification=nonsense.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-07 14:54:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622972037974327304
Reply addressees: @juicedavisx @TheAutistocrat @InternetRadical @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622911727112454144
What do you think brains do? Disambiguation > Auto Association > Prediction > Generalization. Language requires generalization OR vast increases in working memory, when neurons are much more expensive calorically than muscles.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-06 20:48:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622698701507420160
Reply addressees: @juicedavisx @TheAutistocrat @InternetRadical @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622697975423315968
All theoretical structures evolve from generalization of episodes of disambiguation, organization, border, space, objects, all of which are purely constructed from disambiguation of neural stimuli into physical order.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-06 20:23:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622692427784912896
Reply addressees: @juicedavisx @TheAutistocrat @InternetRadical @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622684609564786688
Thats just saying that all mathematics can be expressed with ten digits, positional naming, addition/negation, and one comparison operator.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-06 18:56:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622670702435344413
Reply addressees: @TheAutistocrat @juicedavisx @InternetRadical @whatifalthist
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622669627657527331
Many ways to interpret your tweet. First, yes we can address ideas on the authors terms, but second we can compare them, third categorize them, fourth disambiguate them, and finally ‘science’ them. My purpose here is discussing the failure of team Plato vs Aristotle-Epicurus.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-06 14:37:02 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622605291933126656
Reply addressees: @JapanDissident
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1622602937561190402