Curt Doolittle

Theme: Measurement

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550157314 Timestamp) I don’t know what a metaphysics is if I have constructed one. I know I have deflated and disambiguated LANGUAGE.

    1. I have enumerated the known grammars used by human beings and the history of their development in each era and why.
    2. I have articulated the dimensions of those grammars and how they all function.
    3. I have articulated the constitution of grammars although this is merely a refinement of chomsky.
    4. I have deflated disambiguated, operationalized, and serialized terms from across the fields, reducing all fields to a common vocabulary absent pretense of knowledge (largely idealism).

    And a lot more. Physical science, cognitive science, and if grammars are separate from cognitive science then the grammars, and as far as I know the rest is just ‘lies’. As far as I know philosophy is dead, just as theology is dead. There is only one testifiable method we have today (and have always had) and that is the law, and science is just an application of the law (due diligence and warranty of the truthfulness of one’s statements.) So as far as I know metaphysics as defined in every source I know of (which includes the SEP section 5, stating it does not exist) does not exist as other than an attempt to do as I stated above: fictionalism and lies. In other words, as far as I know P constitutes a logic of constant relations using actions which are all subjectively testable and marginally indifferent as a system of measurement. And language consists entirely of measurement. the question is only the precision of those measurements. Science has demonstrated parsimony.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550152242 Timestamp) Language: a stream of continuous recursive disambiguation resulting in one or more transactions, resulting suggestion at a minimum, a contract for meaning at a on average and due diligence against error, bias, and deceit at a maximum.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550167736 Timestamp) —“CURT: WAS HEIDEGGER RIGHT ABOUT THE CURSE OF MATHINESS?”— —“While we’re on this. Wasn’t that one of Hiedegger’s points all along, too? Every philosopher after Plato and Aristotle, according to him, had gone in the wrong direction. Into the realm of proof, not truth or as Curt Doolittle said before, into the realm of mathematical operations, which is tautological by virtue. They called him a Nazi and proceeded to misinterpret and obfuscate his thoughts into the post-modern milieu. Am I off base here, or what?”— Gabriel Schmeiske Laport First: Congratulations, that’s very smart. And correct. “Mathiness” was a f–king curse we are still trying to get over. Just like christianity is a curse we are still trying to get over. Second: No. Heidegger and Hegel are not wrong in many of their assertions and observations (particularly hegel) they are just trying to solve the wrong problem by retaining german phenomenalism and retaining conflation of experience and existence. Heidegger tries to complete this project by reversing existence and experience. And thus heidegger brought the phenomenalist project to a dead end, just as frege kripke at all brought the anglo analytic project to a dead end. The problem is NOBODY UNDERSTANDS THEY WERE DEAD FUCKING ENDS… lol. The Ango model is superior for the aristocracy and upper middle class, it certainly appears that the Germans are optimum for pedagogy and the working classes. And it increasingly appears that the christians (italians basically) are optimum for the underclasses. And I cannot … (God damn. f—k!! Dammit!!!!!!) …find a way around this problem other than the traditional ‘teach them what you can and take them to their limits, with the law constraining each’. It’s obvious but I don’t want to admit it is the only solution.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550157314 Timestamp) I don’t know what a metaphysics is if I have constructed one. I know I have deflated and disambiguated LANGUAGE.

    1. I have enumerated the known grammars used by human beings and the history of their development in each era and why.
    2. I have articulated the dimensions of those grammars and how they all function.
    3. I have articulated the constitution of grammars although this is merely a refinement of chomsky.
    4. I have deflated disambiguated, operationalized, and serialized terms from across the fields, reducing all fields to a common vocabulary absent pretense of knowledge (largely idealism).

    And a lot more. Physical science, cognitive science, and if grammars are separate from cognitive science then the grammars, and as far as I know the rest is just ‘lies’. As far as I know philosophy is dead, just as theology is dead. There is only one testifiable method we have today (and have always had) and that is the law, and science is just an application of the law (due diligence and warranty of the truthfulness of one’s statements.) So as far as I know metaphysics as defined in every source I know of (which includes the SEP section 5, stating it does not exist) does not exist as other than an attempt to do as I stated above: fictionalism and lies. In other words, as far as I know P constitutes a logic of constant relations using actions which are all subjectively testable and marginally indifferent as a system of measurement. And language consists entirely of measurement. the question is only the precision of those measurements. Science has demonstrated parsimony.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550152242 Timestamp) Language: a stream of continuous recursive disambiguation resulting in one or more transactions, resulting suggestion at a minimum, a contract for meaning at a on average and due diligence against error, bias, and deceit at a maximum.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550343211 Timestamp) TRY IT. by Bill Johnson How could one outsmart a reasonable man (like Curt) who is merely pointing at a truth-testing device? A standard of measure with near NIST-Traceable Calibration. 😉 Curt is not saying he is unbeatable. Rather he is subjecting Propertarianism to the crucible. Bring on the heat. To attack Curt, is not to attack Propertarianism. That would be a fool’s errand. Could they say Curt are pointing at Propertarianism with the wrong hand or finger? Could they say you are not pointing at Propertarianism? That might be more irrational than a Christian Scientist saying his cancer and pain are not real.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550343211 Timestamp) TRY IT. by Bill Johnson How could one outsmart a reasonable man (like Curt) who is merely pointing at a truth-testing device? A standard of measure with near NIST-Traceable Calibration. 😉 Curt is not saying he is unbeatable. Rather he is subjecting Propertarianism to the crucible. Bring on the heat. To attack Curt, is not to attack Propertarianism. That would be a fool’s errand. Could they say Curt are pointing at Propertarianism with the wrong hand or finger? Could they say you are not pointing at Propertarianism? That might be more irrational than a Christian Scientist saying his cancer and pain are not real.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550423126 Timestamp) CLOSING IN ON METAPHYSICS AS NON-EXISTENT, or simply cogn sci: demarcation between observable and experienceable. What is metaphysics other than either operational description(existential) or fiction(inexistential)? Why is M not just another scale of physics just as chemistry another scale of atomic states, and atomic states just another scale of particles, and particles just another scale of fundamental forces, and fundamental forces just another scale of information? Sentience and consiousness are just another scale of the physical world in operation. So just as space time is the result of underlying physical reactions, so are experience and consiousness. I am getting closer I think to understanding the confusion of those who claim it exists but I still have to agree with those who say it is handwaving. AFAIK. the human experience is just a continuation of physics, and all operations and experiences explicable in fairly simple terms the underlying mechanics of which only matter in producing aggregates. Metaphysics as far as I know, simply means the ontology(paradigms) of cognitive science at different levels of commensurable operations (scales), just as physics consists of ontologies(paradigms) at different levels of commensurable operations(scales), and I have seen nothing to alter that understanding (even in aristotle) that proposition other than attempts at sophism, pseudoscience, occult, and fraud. And I am absolutely positive that this will persist. My understanding of the reason is that different disciplines use incompatible (incommensurable) paradigms (ontologies) and as such people have to fictionalize relations between them. However, operatios (analogy to experience no matter how difficult to experience) serves as a universally commensurable system of measurement within and across all scales whether physical or cognitive (or linguistic) and as such M is not a discipline but simply cog sci, and all attempts to say otherwise are simply fictionalisms to compensate for incommensurability generating demand for fictions. In other words fictions produce conflation inflation and opportunity for inductive and deductive error from false premises (ontologies, paradigms), and simply serve as sources of ignorance, fraud, and deceit (Popper). Ergo, metaphysics consists simply an extension of physics in the same commensurable language of operations, and there are not multiple metaphysics, just ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion and obscurantism, fictionalism and deceit.. And I can’t find any alternative explanation. And I’m not at all unique in this understanding. (Van Frassen, McGinn, Thomassen cited in SEP). And the anti-positivist criticism does not hold against falsificationism/critical naturalism – only asks for commensurability across scales, to maintain coherence and parsimony in defense against error, bias, fiction and deceit. And I am still stuck with the non-anglo desire for empathy with ontologies (experiencing) rather than objectivity(describing). Is this purely cultural or are scandinavian(northern european) peoples genetically different in that we have greater distance (agency) between intuition and cognition. AFAIK every problem I have encountered that we call metaphysics is simply a grammatical error. In fact, I’m not sure philosophy exists of much other than grammatical errors (Malformed calculations). And this is because language is a system of measurement that is only as useful as grammatical demands (tolerances) allow. And that as a system of measurement the only deflationary and inflationary method of speech is operations. While certain philosophers have made this claim and have been attacked, these attacks occur under the fallacy of closure in the system of language itself. Which is a common sophomoric argument in philosophical discourse. The only closure is reality itself in toto.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550423126 Timestamp) CLOSING IN ON METAPHYSICS AS NON-EXISTENT, or simply cogn sci: demarcation between observable and experienceable. What is metaphysics other than either operational description(existential) or fiction(inexistential)? Why is M not just another scale of physics just as chemistry another scale of atomic states, and atomic states just another scale of particles, and particles just another scale of fundamental forces, and fundamental forces just another scale of information? Sentience and consiousness are just another scale of the physical world in operation. So just as space time is the result of underlying physical reactions, so are experience and consiousness. I am getting closer I think to understanding the confusion of those who claim it exists but I still have to agree with those who say it is handwaving. AFAIK. the human experience is just a continuation of physics, and all operations and experiences explicable in fairly simple terms the underlying mechanics of which only matter in producing aggregates. Metaphysics as far as I know, simply means the ontology(paradigms) of cognitive science at different levels of commensurable operations (scales), just as physics consists of ontologies(paradigms) at different levels of commensurable operations(scales), and I have seen nothing to alter that understanding (even in aristotle) that proposition other than attempts at sophism, pseudoscience, occult, and fraud. And I am absolutely positive that this will persist. My understanding of the reason is that different disciplines use incompatible (incommensurable) paradigms (ontologies) and as such people have to fictionalize relations between them. However, operatios (analogy to experience no matter how difficult to experience) serves as a universally commensurable system of measurement within and across all scales whether physical or cognitive (or linguistic) and as such M is not a discipline but simply cog sci, and all attempts to say otherwise are simply fictionalisms to compensate for incommensurability generating demand for fictions. In other words fictions produce conflation inflation and opportunity for inductive and deductive error from false premises (ontologies, paradigms), and simply serve as sources of ignorance, fraud, and deceit (Popper). Ergo, metaphysics consists simply an extension of physics in the same commensurable language of operations, and there are not multiple metaphysics, just ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion and obscurantism, fictionalism and deceit.. And I can’t find any alternative explanation. And I’m not at all unique in this understanding. (Van Frassen, McGinn, Thomassen cited in SEP). And the anti-positivist criticism does not hold against falsificationism/critical naturalism – only asks for commensurability across scales, to maintain coherence and parsimony in defense against error, bias, fiction and deceit. And I am still stuck with the non-anglo desire for empathy with ontologies (experiencing) rather than objectivity(describing). Is this purely cultural or are scandinavian(northern european) peoples genetically different in that we have greater distance (agency) between intuition and cognition. AFAIK every problem I have encountered that we call metaphysics is simply a grammatical error. In fact, I’m not sure philosophy exists of much other than grammatical errors (Malformed calculations). And this is because language is a system of measurement that is only as useful as grammatical demands (tolerances) allow. And that as a system of measurement the only deflationary and inflationary method of speech is operations. While certain philosophers have made this claim and have been attacked, these attacks occur under the fallacy of closure in the system of language itself. Which is a common sophomoric argument in philosophical discourse. The only closure is reality itself in toto.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1550505170 Timestamp) That which we can observe through instrumental and logical means That which we can observe That which we can experience That which we can deduce from experience That which we cannot experience (lack of introspection)