Realism > Naturalism > Evolutionary Construction > First Principles > Logic > Vocabulary.
Source date (UTC): 2021-10-04 16:27:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1445063142132920323
Theme: Grammar
-
I’m asking you that question. You argued against my criticism. You won’t define
I’m asking you that question. You argued against my criticism. You won’t define your terms. You just engaged in sophistry. And that’s partly because you don’t understand the first grammatical rule of continuous recursive disambiguation, and the second: the absence of closure.
Source date (UTC): 2021-10-03 22:21:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1444789670450237441
Reply addressees: @vladnabatov @Catholi64501821
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1444788962678161410
-
Can you rephrase that so that it’s unambiguous? 😉 Moderate extremist isn’t a me
Can you rephrase that so that it’s unambiguous? 😉
Moderate extremist isn’t a measurement or classification, it’s an accusation.
Nothing to recommend it could be a declaration of unsatisfactory or of impossibility.
The right has not succeeded in more than a century.
Source date (UTC): 2021-10-01 01:33:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443750997046841349
Reply addressees: @DBCoope57765104
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443750272103243776
-
We all make mistakes. I never err. It’s a burden. But the result of my lifetime’
We all make mistakes. I never err. It’s a burden. But the result of my lifetime’s work, is a formal logic across all human disciplines and this is one of the results. Sorry.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-30 20:56:13 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443681108856561668
Reply addressees: @StepIntoTheNoon @somelocalDJ @AlexAndBooks_
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443679587548995586
-
Ok. I would hug you for that if I could reach you. 😉 lol Now take combinatorics
Ok. I would hug you for that if I could reach you. 😉
lol
Now take combinatorics. In other words computation just like language – because it is the same as language – can compute anything (is endless). Ie universal turning machines using categories rather than infinite memory.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-29 14:33:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443222442588188675
Reply addressees: @HJoshington
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1443221961920888835
-
Scott: martin is trying to get you to define terms so that you can tell the diff
Scott: martin is trying to get you to define terms so that you can tell the difference between the set of opposing frames you’re working with (that’s insightful) and our system of measurement. You’re arguing against straws he’s not putting forward.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-28 23:43:39 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1442998471963860997
Reply addressees: @scottdomianus @WorMartiN @ozumbobar
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1442967447598944256
-
Because under P, we observe the grammars as a spectrum of graceful increase in p
Because under P, we observe the grammars as a spectrum of graceful increase in precision at the cost of meaning, or graceful decrease in precision to decrease the cost of meaning. All that matters is that the paradigm is consistent, correspondent, reciprocal, and possible. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1438557878785396741
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-16 17:39:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1438558244096651265
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1438557878785396741
-
Many questions like this are functions of the grammatical presumption of differe
Many questions like this are functions of the grammatical presumption of different points of view. The other is whether we are constructing an operational description or analogy.
Time and space appear constant (observer) vs the rate of change of processes (experience).
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-06 17:29:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434931765144170502
Reply addressees: @WorMartiN
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434929925702799364
-
Roger. Tip: avoid ‘true…’ because it’s the ‘no true scottsman fallacy’ and it
Roger. Tip: avoid ‘true…’ because it’s the ‘no true scottsman fallacy’ and it means you’re using that term because you don’t know what properties make the thing you’re referring to competitively excellent’.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-05 18:40:09 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434587171067990019
Reply addressees: @Daemon_Knight40 @_notmo
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434585312131440640
-
7) I suspect that the method, language, and law is the ultimate expression of th
7) I suspect that the method, language, and law is the ultimate expression of the universe at the ultimate scale possible, and so I should expect that the natural evolution of understanding should follow the same arc as did evolution in the universe…. sigh.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-05 13:27:38 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434508524147646466
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1434508522943827975
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
6) But then there is this ocean of material to go through before you get to the method, logic, and law. So I’m still stuck in this conflict of how to organize the presentation for maximum effectiveness.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1434508522943827975