Theme: Measurement

  • No sense of moral righteousness and virtue signaling to be had from empirical me

    No sense of moral righteousness and virtue signaling to be had from empirical measures – need petty moralising for the Demi humans to empathise with. Reason and evidence are too difficult for the barely domesticated animals.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-20 14:08:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185920759719432193

    Reply addressees: @BobMurphyEcon

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185908473420304384


    IN REPLY TO:

    @BobMurphyEcon

    In the comments, there is more discussion of trans issues (due to the headline) than public finance issues. Economists are always the low person on the totem pole. https://t.co/tlie2P5oRy

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1185908473420304384

  • I call it Vitruvianism in honor of Davinci’s Vitruivan Man. —“Man is the Syste

    I call it Vitruvianism in honor of Davinci’s Vitruivan Man.

    —“Man is the System of Weights and Measures for all things Human”—

    But the first man to say it:

    —“Man is the measure of all things.”— Protagoras


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-19 18:43:00 UTC

  • So while we might convey meaning by fictionalism, fiction, and idealism, we can

    So while we might convey meaning by fictionalism, fiction, and idealism, we can only testify to the actionable material, costs, and reciprocity. Ergo, establish meaning by fiction, or ideal, then warranty against error, bias, deceit, and fraud by operational (real).


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-16 20:54:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1184573355044810754

    Reply addressees: @MattPirkowski

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1184572810007588864


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @MattPirkowski And the principle fraud insidious: pretension of knowledge and decidability one does not possess.

    In practice, Legal requires both costs and reciprocity; Aristotelian requires the material; ideal and supernatural none. Why? To Testify with responsibility or to Lie without it.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1184572810007588864


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @MattPirkowski And the principle fraud insidious: pretension of knowledge and decidability one does not possess.

    In practice, Legal requires both costs and reciprocity; Aristotelian requires the material; ideal and supernatural none. Why? To Testify with responsibility or to Lie without it.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1184572810007588864

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/72355004_137347730996722_59143672043

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/72355004_137347730996722_5914367204375134208_o_137347727663389.jpg CONTRAST WITH P – REQUEST FROM KASH VIKAS

    (Godel is a Platonist and I’m an Operationalist. This contrast is rather helpful in illustrating the operational vs platonist vs empirical.)

    1. Man acts rationally, and by rationally amorally. But given the disproportionate value of cooperation, and the disproportionate risk of retaliation, it’s just in his interest to act morally much more often than immorally.

    1a. We can incrementally reduce observations of the universe, using our senses, reason, and instrumentation to descriptions of invariant constant relations (paradigms)

    1b + 3. We can describe (explain) all of experience as constant relations (a single paradigm)

    2. While our ability to reason is constant, every increase convergence of our instruments and paradigms increases the explanatory power available to our reason.

    4. The capacity to reason is a deterministic product of entropy at convenient temperatures in convenient conditions, for sufficient periods of time. It is likely that given the vastness of the universe, other creatures have evolved reason, and that while the logic of constant relations will exist, and mathematics as a logic of constant positional relations will exist in some form, that the composition of experience that results from different body structures will result in different techniques for employing reason. (think octopi). And that the ability of these creatures may vastly outperform ours.

    5. Because we are able to use our powers of prediction using free association to construct a model of the world we exist in, and the worlds we might exist in, and the worlds we cannot exist in, we can experience, many candidate worlds.

    5b. The set of demands we evolved and express daily is largely invariant. The set of paradigms we use to imagine opportunities for fulfilling those demands evolves (and devolves) constantly. So while we largely increase the coherence of paradigms, and approach a single paradigm for describing the universe, we have experienced the world differently in the past than in the present, and will so again experience it differently in the future.

    6. If we can construct an operational grammar and paradigm for a given set of constant relations, we can produce an operational logic of that set of constant relations, and conduct experiments logically by trial and error as we do in mathematics. To do so we require convergence of paradigms to the point of marginal indifference of those logical constructions. But the Analytic program failed, and Godel and Frege et all were wrong – closure does not exist.

    7. Yes the development of thought since Aristotle expanded on Democritus, has been consistent and rational with the exception of the semitic abrahamic dark ages of supernatural ignorance.

    8. Reason is reason is reasoning and there is nothing to it. There are however endless permutations of reason especially as knowledge increases.

    9. The via-negativa of Natural Law can be restated in the via-positiva as Natural rights, and this logic and empirical combination produces a science of cooperation, and law the institutional enforcement of cooperation under that law, and economics the measure of it’s success, and economics the language of analysis and measurement within that science.

    10.The material(noun) and the Operational(verb) are true (exist, and are testifiable). The platonic (ideal) is false. All sets of constant relations are identified, retained, applied, reinforced, and revised by merging physical stimuli with physical organization of information in the brain, producing a hierarchy of changes in state over time we call ‘experience’. So while it is correct to say that the universe is deterministic (composed of constant relations), it is only correct to say that we can observe sets of constant relations, identify them (category), compare them, name them, and predict future states of of them, and in relation to them. These memories and predications like running consist of physical potential, that produce results in time. In other words, al of reality is constructed physically, from a hierarchy of changes in state over time we call experience.

    12. Concepts do not exist. the potential for Concepts exists. Running only exists when one is running. We have the potential to run. We have the potential to identify sets of constant relations (concepts), but experience of contexts only exist when we are acting to recall them in time.

    13. It appears we can know the most parsimonious paradigm, and host of parsimonious sub-paradigms of increasing complexity (permutations) allowing us to speak the truth using evidence – science; that we can know the same for choices using arguments – philosophy; and we can know the same for collective organization using stories – theology.

    14. Existing religions are bad to terrible to suicidal – but human psychological, social, political, and strategic demand for the products of ‘religion’ (order) are endless. So we need to educate one another in mindfulness, ethics(interpersonal), morality (extrapersonal), political, and strategic (competitive), by means gracefully increasing and decreasing in accessibility: parable, story, history, reason and general rules, science and outcomes.CONTRAST WITH P – REQUEST FROM KASH VIKAS

    (Godel is a Platonist and I’m an Operationalist. This contrast is rather helpful in illustrating the operational vs platonist vs empirical.)

    1. Man acts rationally, and by rationally amorally. But given the disproportionate value of cooperation, and the disproportionate risk of retaliation, it’s just in his interest to act morally much more often than immorally.

    1a. We can incrementally reduce observations of the universe, using our senses, reason, and instrumentation to descriptions of invariant constant relations (paradigms)

    1b + 3. We can describe (explain) all of experience as constant relations (a single paradigm)

    2. While our ability to reason is constant, every increase convergence of our instruments and paradigms increases the explanatory power available to our reason.

    4. The capacity to reason is a deterministic product of entropy at convenient temperatures in convenient conditions, for sufficient periods of time. It is likely that given the vastness of the universe, other creatures have evolved reason, and that while the logic of constant relations will exist, and mathematics as a logic of constant positional relations will exist in some form, that the composition of experience that results from different body structures will result in different techniques for employing reason. (think octopi). And that the ability of these creatures may vastly outperform ours.

    5. Because we are able to use our powers of prediction using free association to construct a model of the world we exist in, and the worlds we might exist in, and the worlds we cannot exist in, we can experience, many candidate worlds.

    5b. The set of demands we evolved and express daily is largely invariant. The set of paradigms we use to imagine opportunities for fulfilling those demands evolves (and devolves) constantly. So while we largely increase the coherence of paradigms, and approach a single paradigm for describing the universe, we have experienced the world differently in the past than in the present, and will so again experience it differently in the future.

    6. If we can construct an operational grammar and paradigm for a given set of constant relations, we can produce an operational logic of that set of constant relations, and conduct experiments logically by trial and error as we do in mathematics. To do so we require convergence of paradigms to the point of marginal indifference of those logical constructions. But the Analytic program failed, and Godel and Frege et all were wrong – closure does not exist.

    7. Yes the development of thought since Aristotle expanded on Democritus, has been consistent and rational with the exception of the semitic abrahamic dark ages of supernatural ignorance.

    8. Reason is reason is reasoning and there is nothing to it. There are however endless permutations of reason especially as knowledge increases.

    9. The via-negativa of Natural Law can be restated in the via-positiva as Natural rights, and this logic and empirical combination produces a science of cooperation, and law the institutional enforcement of cooperation under that law, and economics the measure of it’s success, and economics the language of analysis and measurement within that science.

    10.The material(noun) and the Operational(verb) are true (exist, and are testifiable). The platonic (ideal) is false. All sets of constant relations are identified, retained, applied, reinforced, and revised by merging physical stimuli with physical organization of information in the brain, producing a hierarchy of changes in state over time we call ‘experience’. So while it is correct to say that the universe is deterministic (composed of constant relations), it is only correct to say that we can observe sets of constant relations, identify them (category), compare them, name them, and predict future states of of them, and in relation to them. These memories and predications like running consist of physical potential, that produce results in time. In other words, al of reality is constructed physically, from a hierarchy of changes in state over time we call experience.

    12. Concepts do not exist. the potential for Concepts exists. Running only exists when one is running. We have the potential to run. We have the potential to identify sets of constant relations (concepts), but experience of contexts only exist when we are acting to recall them in time.

    13. It appears we can know the most parsimonious paradigm, and host of parsimonious sub-paradigms of increasing complexity (permutations) allowing us to speak the truth using evidence – science; that we can know the same for choices using arguments – philosophy; and we can know the same for collective organization using stories – theology.

    14. Existing religions are bad to terrible to suicidal – but human psychological, social, political, and strategic demand for the products of ‘religion’ (order) are endless. So we need to educate one another in mindfulness, ethics(interpersonal), morality (extrapersonal), political, and strategic (competitive), by means gracefully increasing and decreasing in accessibility: parable, story, history, reason and general rules, science and outcomes.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-16 10:49:00 UTC

  • DISAMIBIGUATION … Confidence (Real, Self, High ) – I have confidence in … ..

    DISAMIBIGUATION

    … Confidence (Real, Self, High ) – I have confidence in …

    … … Belief (ideal, Consensus, Medium) – I believe …

    … … … Faith (supernatural, Authority, Low) – I have faith in …

    … … … … Conviction (Ideal, Self, Medium,) – My conviction…

    Confidence in evidence

    Belief in reason

    Faith in intuition

    Conviction in decision.

    I avoid the words belief and faith.

    I use:

    … ‘as far as I know’

    … ‘i can’t falsify’

    or

    … ‘it’s not decidable’

    … ‘it’s a preference or a good not a truth’

    I should also use:

    … ‘i have confidence in’


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-14 09:21:00 UTC

  • Math isn’t complicated, it’s trivial. More trivial than the foundations of the u

    Math isn’t complicated, it’s trivial. More trivial than the foundations of the universe, which is why we can measure the foundations of the universe and all that results from it until we approach sentience at which point the purpose of memory is to outwit those constant relations


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-10 15:17:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182314180667416578

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182313961573814277


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JayMan471 So the fundamental patterns of the universe are simply the consequence of different ratios of the constant relations between different fundamental forces, which we can name with positional names, that we call numbers, and describe by changes in position in or across time.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182313961573814277


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JayMan471 So the fundamental patterns of the universe are simply the consequence of different ratios of the constant relations between different fundamental forces, which we can name with positional names, that we call numbers, and describe by changes in position in or across time.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182313961573814277

  • So the fundamental patterns of the universe are simply the consequence of differ

    So the fundamental patterns of the universe are simply the consequence of different ratios of the constant relations between different fundamental forces, which we can name with positional names, that we call numbers, and describe by changes in position in or across time.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-10 15:16:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182313961573814277

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182313598904946690


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JayMan471 So we see patterns in the universe (forces, particles, elements, molecules, biological molecules, proteins, cell walls etc because the available ratios of those fundamental forces are limited in permutation. However, the permutations of each level of permutation increase.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182313598904946690


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JayMan471 So we see patterns in the universe (forces, particles, elements, molecules, biological molecules, proteins, cell walls etc because the available ratios of those fundamental forces are limited in permutation. However, the permutations of each level of permutation increase.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182313598904946690

  • 3 -The physical universe makes use of a more complex grammar we call the fundame

    3 -The physical universe makes use of a more complex grammar we call the fundamental forces. Those fundamental forces consist of constant relations to one another, and are expressible in the language of constant relations using unique names by positional naming.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-10 15:13:22 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182313177385766913

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182312875177775104


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @JayMan471 2 – Just as the nautilus produce patterns because of ratios or previous ratios, all other ratios of ratios (mathematics) produce patterns. So mathematics consist of a language (grammar and semantics) of constant relation using positional names.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182312875177775104


    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @JayMan471 2 – Just as the nautilus produce patterns because of ratios or previous ratios, all other ratios of ratios (mathematics) produce patterns. So mathematics consist of a language (grammar and semantics) of constant relation using positional names.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1182312875177775104

  • 1 – The opposite. Mathematics is trivial. It consists entirely of positional nam

    1 – The opposite. Mathematics is trivial. It consists entirely of positional names, and nothing else. Positional naming provides scale independence b/c positions are all ratios; arbitrary naming (correspondence), and invariable constant relations because of that single dimension.


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-10 15:07:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182311808461414401

    Reply addressees: @JayMan471

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182139482717470720


    IN REPLY TO:

    @JayMan471

    Sometimes I wonder about mathematics. Why is there deeper structure? https://t.co/9WRnjsWojn

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1182139482717470720

  • “Science explains and Mathematics describes the universe. However, engineers are

    —“Science explains and Mathematics describes the universe. However, engineers are necessary to produce calculations and write procedures and processes for the technician that produces the machines that the clerk, and laborer use to produce the goods services and information the individual consumes. Not everyone will understand the math, but many can follow the procedures, and benefit from whatever is produced by them.”— JWarren Warren


    Source date (UTC): 2019-10-10 12:28:00 UTC