Curt Doolittle

Theme: Measurement

  • Incline for more information and decline for less information (knowledge). So I

    Incline for more information and decline for less information (knowledge). So I guess it’s a nit, but we use the method of satisfying demand for decidability (which is what you mean as faith, belief, experience, prediction) depends upon the knowledge we have.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 16:08:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175079244348739589

    Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175078578121269253

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @PoseidonAwoke So faith (religion/theology), belief(reason/philosophy), experience (sensory evidence/memory), prediction (measurement/science) constitute a spectrum of systems of reasoning we use in order to determine individual and collective(political) actions. A graceful incline and decline.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175078578121269253

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @PoseidonAwoke So faith (religion/theology), belief(reason/philosophy), experience (sensory evidence/memory), prediction (measurement/science) constitute a spectrum of systems of reasoning we use in order to determine individual and collective(political) actions. A graceful incline and decline.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175078578121269253

  • So faith (religion/theology), belief(reason/philosophy), experience (sensory evi

    So faith (religion/theology), belief(reason/philosophy), experience (sensory evidence/memory), prediction (measurement/science) constitute a spectrum of systems of reasoning we use in order to determine individual and collective(political) actions. A graceful incline and decline.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 16:05:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175078578121269253

    Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175077489753972738

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @PoseidonAwoke Ok, but I think you’re conflating religious faith (past & fixed) with prediction (Future & evolving ). In other words we must depend upon something in order to narrow the costs our trial and error (oppy.). Using measurement (instrumental and logical) is only means of doing it.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175077489753972738

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @PoseidonAwoke Ok, but I think you’re conflating religious faith (past & fixed) with prediction (Future & evolving ). In other words we must depend upon something in order to narrow the costs our trial and error (oppy.). Using measurement (instrumental and logical) is only means of doing it.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175077489753972738

  • Ok, but I think you’re conflating religious faith (past & fixed) with prediction

    Ok, but I think you’re conflating religious faith (past & fixed) with prediction (Future & evolving ). In other words we must depend upon something in order to narrow the costs our trial and error (oppy.). Using measurement (instrumental and logical) is only means of doing it.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 16:01:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175077489753972738

    Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175073766126305280

    IN REPLY TO:

    @PoseidonAwoke

    @curtdoolittle To rephrase : There is more due diligence required around the fundamental understandings of our world. This proposed model of motion through space (a single example of many) requires honest inquiry. To accept it on faith is an act of faith. We need to be skeptical here.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175073766126305280

  • So I can’t figure out if you’re saying ‘you can’t extrapolate a curve -there is

    So I can’t figure out if you’re saying ‘you can’t extrapolate a curve -there is something wrong with our understanding of the universe (physics), economics(cooperation) and law (suppression of parasitism)’; or if there is any alternative to science (due diligence in testimony).

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-20 15:19:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175066993130647552

    Reply addressees: @PoseidonAwoke

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1175066411523350528

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @PoseidonAwoke Butch, not that I want to persuade you of anything one way or the other, but this theme of yours is consistent. … Just because knowledge is incomplete does not mean it does not advance toward completeness. Sciences produce consistent increases in knowledge by trial and error.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175066411523350528

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @PoseidonAwoke Butch, not that I want to persuade you of anything one way or the other, but this theme of yours is consistent. … Just because knowledge is incomplete does not mean it does not advance toward completeness. Sciences produce consistent increases in knowledge by trial and error.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1175066411523350528

  • Understanding the Grammar Facility vs the Trivium (important)

    Signs? AFAIK signs and symbols are a categorically under the grammar facility (ability). So it’s a question of whether you grasp logic (facility) grammar (continuous recursive disambiguation) and rhetoric (persuasion, argument) as a series from basic to intermediate to complex; and whether you separate sounds, actions, and marks (marks, pictures, symbols, glyphs), or categorize them as the same. Since the language facility is physically independent of sound, action, or mark, then whether we sound, act, or make marks is irrelevant. And the study of sounds, acts, and marks are just subsets, as is vocabulary. The interesting question is what limits to our calculation (reasoning) exist without language, drawing, and symbols to assist in categorization, composition, narration, and memory substitutes. SPECTRUM: 1. Sense(stimuli) … … Perception (composition) … … … Association 2. Logic Facility (constant relations) … … Imagination Facility (prediction) … … … Reason Facility (comparison, permutation) 3. Grammar facility (statements) … … Paradigms (‘metaphysics’, ‘dimensions’) … … Vocabulary … … … Sounds … … … Signs (acts, actions) … … … Marks (records) … … … … accidental … … … … intentional … … … … … Mark … … … … … Symbol … … … … … … Glyph … … … … … Pictogram … … … … … Picture … … … … … Picture Series … … … … … Animation 4. Communication Facility (“Language”) … Truths … … Logics (deflationary Grammars) … … Rhetoric (argumentative, persuasive Grammars) … Descriptions … … Testimony … Ordinary Language … Narrations (inflationary Grammars) … … Narrative (description) … … … Storytelling (loading, framing) … Deceits … … … Fictionalism … … … …. (idealism-> surrealism, … … … …. supernaturalism->occult, and … … … …. pseudoscience -> magic) … … … Obscurantism (Obscuring, Overloading) … … … … Propaganda … … … Misdirection (Deceit) … … … Fraud (for gain) … … … Harm (Evil, for harm regardless of gain) IN OTHER WORDS The cognitive grammaticists are mostly right.

  • I Think Philosophy is Closed.

    I think the demarcation between truth(decidability) and choice (preference) is complete. Philosophy now only tells us choice, while law (reciprocity), science(consistency correspondence, and coherence), and mathematics(measurement) provide decidability regardless of choice. The top of the epistemic pyramid is not philosophy(rationalism) but testimony, law, science, mathematics, and the logic faculty in a consistent coherent ontology. While philosophy (arbitrary ontology) has nothing to say but choice. In other words, Law (cooperation) science (evidence), mathematics(measurement) are merely an extension of testimony. Which is why the west developed them. We are the only people that base our law entirely on sovereignty and therefore we have no other choice but testimony, law, science and math for decidability.

  • I Think Philosophy is Closed.

    I think the demarcation between truth(decidability) and choice (preference) is complete. Philosophy now only tells us choice, while law (reciprocity), science(consistency correspondence, and coherence), and mathematics(measurement) provide decidability regardless of choice. The top of the epistemic pyramid is not philosophy(rationalism) but testimony, law, science, mathematics, and the logic faculty in a consistent coherent ontology. While philosophy (arbitrary ontology) has nothing to say but choice. In other words, Law (cooperation) science (evidence), mathematics(measurement) are merely an extension of testimony. Which is why the west developed them. We are the only people that base our law entirely on sovereignty and therefore we have no other choice but testimony, law, science and math for decidability.

  • Doesn’t tell me anything other than evidence of action is superior to descriptio

    Doesn’t tell me anything other than evidence of action is superior to description of action, narrative, storytelling, fictionalization of actions. I mean, etymology doesn’t even remain constant.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 21:24:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173709345105821696

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173708897561010176

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Semiogogue

    @curtdoolittle Roger that. Look at a group of prehistoric hunters. They follow a track. It has a before and an after, based upon linear sequence mapping to the passage of time. Event sequence. Reading such signs as reliable environmental indicators is the basis of eating and NOT getting eaten.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173708897561010176

  • Words, like dna, lose their means of past construction, and retain only their cu

    Words, like dna, lose their means of past construction, and retain only their current associations. Words are products manufactured in the moment. Are you trying to do what webster did, or the Egyptians did, and the chinese less so, and anchor words in time?

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 21:21:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173708556350251008

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173707729510309889

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Semiogogue

    @curtdoolittle No desire to unmake words. Only to show what they rest upon, their developmental antecedents, which are *persistent* and running, mostly unnoticed, as a parallel (and older) system: territorial, environmental and resource marks. Marks used to shape behavior.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173707729510309889

  • All language is reducible to analogy to experience and all experience communicab

    All language is reducible to analogy to experience and all experience communicable by language marginally indifferent. ie: measurements.

    Source date (UTC): 2019-09-16 21:17:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173707577944870912

    Reply addressees: @Semiogogue

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173707173286879237

    IN REPLY TO:

    @Semiogogue

    @curtdoolittle How are words ‘measurements’? Is a poem falsifiable?

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1173707173286879237