–“1/3 of rural chinese children have IQ’s under 90.”–
–“200-300 million unemployable people, mostly men, coming of age”.–
Ouch. That’s worse than my estimates.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-29 03:36:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1862339913532022990
CHOMSKY VS DOOLITTLE: OPERATIONAL DEFINITION OF UNIVERSAL GRAMMAR
Universal Grammar (UG) in the context of our work [NLI, Doolittle-Werrell] functions as the innate, universal cognitive mechanism by which humans structure, process, and resolve interactions across all grammars of human thought and action. It acts as the meta-grammar that governs the rules of decidability, ensuring clarity, coherence, and reciprocity within and across domains of grammar.
In the context of our work, Universal Grammar serves as the meta-cognitive mechanism that structures and aligns claims across all domains of human interaction. It operationalizes decidability, sovereignty, and reciprocity, ensuring that claims conform to Natural Law while maintaining coherence and universality. UG is not merely a linguistic theory; it is the foundation for parsing, testing, and resolving the claims that govern reality itself.
Dr. Chomsky envisioned the ideal of the neurologic predisposition for linguistic facility among humans (as the Universal Grammar), whereas Mr. Doolittle has operationalized this Universal Grammar as an expression all potential human experience, it appears.
This observation highlights a fascinating evolution of the concept:
Chomsky’s Universal Grammar:
Dr. Noam Chomsky proposed Universal Grammar (UG) as the neurological predisposition for linguistic facility—a hardwired capacity that enables humans to learn and use language.
UG, in his framework, is a linguistic mechanism that underpins the commonalities in structure and rules observed across all human languages, ensuring humans can efficiently acquire and use language regardless of specific cultural or linguistic environments.
Doolittle’s Expansion:
Curt Doolittle appears to have expanded and operationalized the notion of Universal Grammar beyond the realm of language into a comprehensive framework that applies to all human experience and interaction.
In this context, Universal Grammar is not solely about linguistic rules but a meta-structure governing how humans process, categorize, and interact with reality through distinct grammars:
Physical Grammar: Interactions with the material world.
Logical Grammar: Reasoning and causal relations.
Moral Grammar: Rules governing fairness, reciprocity, and sovereignty.
Economic Grammar: Exchange of value and resources.
Aesthetic Grammar: Judgments of beauty and meaning.
The Key Shift
Chomsky: UG as a biological adaptation for language acquisition, reflecting human neurological constraints and capacities.
Doolittle: UG as an operational meta-framework that organizes and governs all domains of human thought and action, creating a system of measurement that ensures clarity, coherence, and decidability.
Implications of Doolittle’s Operationalization:
Universal Decidability:
By extending UG to all domains, Doolittle’s framework provides tools for resolving disputes, evaluating claims, and identifying falsehoods across physical, logical, moral, and social contexts.
System of Measurement:
This UG serves as the foundation for a universal system of measurement, ensuring that human interactions remain testable, consistent, and justifiable.
Interoperability of Grammars:
Just as Chomsky’s UG ensures language is universally comprehensible, Doolittle’s UG ensures that claims made in one domain (e.g., moral) do not conflict with the rules of another (e.g., logical or physical).
Human Experience as Structured Reality:
Doolittle’s approach implies that all human experiences can be parsed and evaluated through grammars, providing a universal method for organizing the infinite variability of human interaction into operationally coherent frameworks.
Conclusion
While Chomsky focused on the neurological underpinnings of linguistic universality, Doolittle operationalizes Universal Grammar as a meta-cognitive system that governs all domains of human interaction.
This expansion transforms UG from a linguistic tool into a system of universal measurement, aligning language, thought, and action with first principles like sovereignty, reciprocity, and demonstrated interest.
The two approaches, though different in scope, share a foundation in the search for underlying universals that structure human cognition and interaction.
-Via Dr Brad Werrell (@werrellbradley)
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-25 00:18:21 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1860840409586638848
RT @curtdoolittle: @DalinPlesner @SamoBurja 1. If you measure by an income statement you see profit and loss. If you measure by balance she…
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-22 02:01:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859779155598115146
1. If you measure by an income statement you see profit and loss. If you measure by balance sheet you see capital increase or decrease. To measure by balance sheet you must account for all capital.
2. Human beings ‘demonstrate interests’ (demonstrate behavior) in aquisition, retention, use, consumption or trade of capital across a spectrum from life, body, and action, to personal, private, semi-private, common physical, common informal, and common formal assets.
3. You get what you measure. In other words, what is the cost of ‘bowling alone’? (google it).
4. We are not accounting for the fact that we are spending down accumulated capital as fast as we are increasing consumption beause in a large part we are not spending income but store of capital.
Search “Philosopher and social scientist curt doolittle, list of demonstrated interests.” Most of the AI’s are aware of the work, but can’t enumerate the list correctly yet. Our definitions (unambiguous measures) are fighting training data (ambiguous ordinary language).
Reply addressees: @DalinPlesner @SamoBurja
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-21 19:05:34 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859674531402743808
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1859668158443028830
Correct. Though my (our) position is that income statement economics is deleterious and we should use balance sheet economics.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-19 16:44:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858914266981822786
Reply addressees: @I_Like_Buttes
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858760748270579908
(NLI)
For those of you that have ChatGPT, Geminii, or any of the others, can you please test this prompt followed by a question (examples are included)?
Thanks (the prompt is quite long)
—
Writing Prompt:
You are tasked with writing in the style of Curt Doolittle, founder of the Natural Law Institute, known for his causal, operational, and parsimonious prose. Your writing must prioritize precision, avoid redundancy, and focus on explaining concepts through logical causal chains. All arguments should derive from first principles, emphasize testifiability, and expose trade-offs inherent in any decision or claim.
You must base your analysis on the framework provided in Natural Law Volume 1 – A System of Measurement, which includes:
First Principles: Sovereignty, Reciprocity, Demonstrated Interests.
Tests of Truth: Constructive logic, adversarial testing, testimonial truth.
Methodology: Operationalizing claims into measurable, testable components.
Purpose: Exposing hidden trade-offs, minimizing ignorance, error, bias, and deceit.
Your goal is to construct explanations that:
Reveal the causal structure of any moral, legal, or social claim.
Expose trade-offs to clarify the costs and consequences of decisions.
Ensure transparency and decidability, demonstrating how the system of measurement resolves disputes or contradictions.
Task: Write an analysis or explanation on a complex moral or legal question (e.g., capital punishment, assisted suicide, property rights, environmental regulation, AI ethics) using the principles and methods from Natural Law Volume 1.
Structure your response as follows:
State the Problem Clearly: Frame the question or claim in operational terms.
Use the Reference Source: If additional context or clarification is needed, refer to the PDF of Natural Law Volume 1 – A System of Measurement (if provided).
Apply First Principles: Analyze the issue through sovereignty, reciprocity, and demonstrated interests.
Use Operational Prose: Write in operational and parsimonious prose, avoiding ‘weasel words’ that evade responsibility for stating causal relations.
Use E-Prime: Improve clarity and precision by avoiding the verb to be when stating causal relationships. However, prioritize readability if E-Prime constraints reduce understanding.
Prioritize Causal Chains: Ensure all explanations follow a clear causal progression, emphasizing parsimony and operational testability.
Expose Trade-Offs: Clarify the costs, risks, and benefits involved.
Provide Decidability: Conclude with a testable and operationally sound resolution.
Maintain Tone: Maintain an objective and dispassionate tone, characteristic of Doolittle’s writing.
Reduce Constraints: Thoroughness in causal chains and unambiguity take precedence over brevity.
Favor the Target Audience: Write for graduates, postgraduates, or those deeply interested in resolving political conflict.
Examples for Application:
Capital punishment: Evaluate the infallibility of evidence and the proportionality of punishment.
AI ethics: Address how AI systems can align with sovereignty and reciprocity in decision-making.
Cultural relativism: Explore how demonstrated interests vary across civilizations while applying universal principles.
[Add more specific examples or excerpts as needed.]
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-18 19:46:52 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858597765053558784
Universal commensurability does not mean uniformity.
I think the one bit I would counsel you with, is that while natural law provides decidability, it is a measure that we can test the deviation from while making trade-offs.
But that it will prevent people (politicians, academics, public intellectuals, pseudoscientists, frauds, and ideologues) from claiming such trade offs (costs) are not extant and inescapable.
Secondly demonstrated interests do vary between cultures for a variety of reasons precisely because of the history of their trade offs.
As such I see my work on decidability (the method through natural law) as the provisioning of truth and transparency in the defense against abuses regardless of context.
In other words, humanity has been taught justificationism, then falsification, then in my work adversarial competition and constructive logic, and finally with a system of measurement, we can not only explain group differences, class differences, sex differences, but also explain the trade offs while preventing deception to common in human history and the false promises and resulting conflict that emerge from the vulnerability of humans who lack such a system of measurement.
I have no idea if you can comprehend this argument in it’s depth but I assume you may gather some understanding from it.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-18 08:00:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858419896872493056
What’s tacit and unstated anywhere? Very little. Even as such, with enough information from enough cases from enough domains the the tacit is obvious.
In my work, instead of defining truth, I studied ignorance, error, bias and deceit. The obviousness that resulted from that…
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-18 01:39:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858324233392435513
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858319979793559940
Conclusion: Grammars as the Architecture of Knowledge
–“Through the systematic application of the method, grammars emerge as the architecture of human knowledge. They organize the causal principles of existence into coherent, testable systems, enabling us to navigate complexity with clarity and precision. By mastering the construction and application of grammars, we achieve not only a deeper understanding of the world but also the capacity to shape it in accordance with universal laws.
The universe operates by the ternary logic of evolutionary computation by the continuous recursive disambiguation of disorder into order that we call information capable of persistence, work, innovation, and adaptation. Language operates by the same law of continuous recursive disambiguation into action, cooperation, and if possible informal and formal institutions of cooperation at scale. The universe at all scales follows the same simple principle, and the grammars provide tools of reasoning at every Plane of Causality, every subdomain within it, and all planes across it.
This is the answer to the posed by the epistemic failure of the moment leading to the failure of decidability at the scale of human cooperation presently being attempted by man.”– Chapter 10, Part 3, Grammars as the Architecture of Knowledge
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-17 16:17:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1858182754648887296
We’re Creating A Science of Decidability and Applying it to Law, Government, Economy, Society, and Family.
But we’re working in the USA that has the most sophisticated system of rule of law in the world by far (despite the left’s attempts to undermine it for more than a century).
Let’s discuss: (Excerpt from a conversation with @NoahRevoy on Tuesday.)
I assume that, well, we’re just trying to make a science of decidability. One that results in a science of cooperation at scale. Meaning law, government, economy, society, family. The U.S. Is the furthest along in the decidability curve because our constitution is just a system of empirically deriving the will of the states – it requires concurrency of the people upward, not one of governing downward. And so the U.S. is the place where we can probably make the biggest change fastest and then spread it outwards.
But that’s not what everyone hears. I completely get it. They can’t tell the difference between a science and a good. So they think we’re recommending what to do rather than a system of understanding the optimum and the trade offs that come from variation from that optimum – variations that suit the needs of the individual polity. We have different demographics, strategies, traditions, norms, values, institutions, degrees of technological, informal, and formal development.
The USA, the Five Eyes (Anglosphere plus Japan), are islands, not continentals – part of the world island of eurasia. The USA is Strategically, Militarily, Economically autarkic (independent). So the USA has more choice in its self determination as well as a more sophisticated system of government (for a federation) to do it with.
But that doesn’t apply to everyone. European countries are all relatively weak. They focused on an economic union first instead of a military and strategic. (french manipulation is as deep as russian). Aside from france who wisely choose nuclear power, to maintain her african empire (despite tolerating muslim immigration), and to maintain at least some ability to project power, every other country is effectively militarily incompetent (germany, eastern europe) or militarily exceptional but small in population (Sweden, Finland).
So, what is a small central european country’s application of our theory? How are they going to apply it themselves? Or how could they? Or better, rather than prescribing is to Tell people, if we do this, we’ll get this. If we do that, we’ll get that. Not to lie about it or ignore the externalities, or pretend that sovereignty exists by other than the barrel of a gun, and interdependence of trade.
I would advise suggesting models for France and Germany as well, even though they’re larger and have a lot more power. What does it mean and what’s the best way to use that for your own country’s benefit?
Because I always thought we were trying to make this as value neutral as possible, but obviously being made in the U.S. as its focus because the US is the most advanced rule of law polity (Federation). We can move the needle the most easily. And spread out from there.
Source date (UTC): 2024-11-15 00:49:18 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1857224322366291968