Human nature invests minimum to gain maximum and is quite lazy when it comes to unnecessary precision, but then attempts to use imprecise terms (and ideas) to solve precise problems.
Human experties in sciences (deflationary grammars) serves to deflate any given level of abstraction. I have a chart you need to see.
I understand the unification of the sciences and I think plenty of other people do – but it’s just very different from what we’d expected.
—“the inference would be that a corresponding language of specificity would be a part of that.”—
Well, exactly.
–“However, that is not why we have failed at achieving”—
The reason we failed is that there is a market for agency via deception (non-correspondence, inconsistency, and in-coherence), just as much as there is a market for agency via truthfulness(correspondence, consistency, and coherence).
Ergo, just as we have eliminated the markets for violence, theft, fraud, free riding, etc, we can eliminate the market for falsehoods: by law. The problem was (and is no longer) a criteria for warranty of due diligence against falsehood of information entered intot he informational commons.
In other words, I’m not ‘selling’. I’m not interested in convincing people that crime is crime, only in producing law that states what crime is, and therefore outlaws it.
People will then respond accordingly – as they always have done – to incremental suppression of parasitism.
And that is the means by which we have produced civilization: the incremental suppression of parasitism through the incremental expansion of the law, by the discovery and cataloging the means by which man engages in parasitism.
So I am not really writing philosophy (choice and preference), but law (necessity and truth).
Hence my lack of concern for what ‘people think’. People have ‘thought’ that outlawing each form of parasitism was bad in every generation because it forces them into survival in the service of others in the market – and non-survival if they do not.
Theme: Measurement
-
Why I Write Natural Law (Science) Not Philosophy (Choice).
Human nature invests minimum to gain maximum and is quite lazy when it comes to unnecessary precision, but then attempts to use imprecise terms (and ideas) to solve precise problems. Human experties in sciences (deflationary grammars) serves to deflate any given level of abstraction. I have a chart you need to see. I understand the unification of the sciences and I think plenty of other people do – but it’s just very different from what we’d expected. —“the inference would be that a corresponding language of specificity would be a part of that.”— Well, exactly. –“However, that is not why we have failed at achieving”— The reason we failed is that there is a market for agency via deception (non-correspondence, inconsistency, and in-coherence), just as much as there is a market for agency via truthfulness(correspondence, consistency, and coherence). Ergo, just as we have eliminated the markets for violence, theft, fraud, free riding, etc, we can eliminate the market for falsehoods: by law. The problem was (and is no longer) a criteria for warranty of due diligence against falsehood of information entered intot he informational commons. In other words, I’m not ‘selling’. I’m not interested in convincing people that crime is crime, only in producing law that states what crime is, and therefore outlaws it. People will then respond accordingly – as they always have done – to incremental suppression of parasitism. And that is the means by which we have produced civilization: the incremental suppression of parasitism through the incremental expansion of the law, by the discovery and cataloging the means by which man engages in parasitism. So I am not really writing philosophy (choice and preference), but law (necessity and truth). Hence my lack of concern for what ‘people think’. People have ‘thought’ that outlawing each form of parasitism was bad in every generation because it forces them into survival in the service of others in the market – and non-survival if they do not. -
WHY I WRITE NATURAL LAW (SCIENCE) NOT PHILOSOPHY (CHOICE). Human nature invests
WHY I WRITE NATURAL LAW (SCIENCE) NOT PHILOSOPHY (CHOICE).
Human nature invests minimum to gain maximum and is quite lazy when it comes to unnecessary precision, but then attempts to use imprecise terms (and ideas) to solve precise problems.
Human experties in sciences (deflationary grammars) serves to deflate any given level of abstraction. I have a chart you need to see.
I understand the unification of the sciences and I think plenty of other people do – but it’s just very different from what we’d expected.
—“the inference would be that a corresponding language of specificity would be a part of that.”—
Well, exactly.
–“However, that is not why we have failed at achieving”—
The reason we failed is that there is a market for agency via deception (non-correspondence, inconsistency, and in-coherence), just as much as there is a market for agency via truthfulness(correspondence, consistency, and coherence).
Ergo, just as we have eliminated the markets for violence, theft, fraud, free riding, etc, we can eliminate the market for falsehoods: by law. The problem was (and is no longer) a criteria for warranty of due diligence against falsehood of information entered intot he informational commons.
In other words, I’m not ‘selling’. I’m not interested in convincing people that crime is crime, only in producing law that states what crime is, and therefore outlaws it.
People will then respond accordingly – as they always have done – to incremental suppression of parasitism.
And that is the means by which we have produced civilization: the incremental suppression of parasitism through the incremental expansion of the law, by the discovery and cataloging the means by which man engages in parasitism.
So I am not really writing philosophy (choice and preference), but law (necessity and truth).
Hence my lack of concern for what ‘people think’. People have ‘thought’ that outlawing each form of parasitism was bad in every generation because it forces them into survival in the service of others in the market – and non-survival if they do not.
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-25 12:42:00 UTC
-
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly cons
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly constructed grammar) in ordinary language, yet you treat formal grammars (mathematics: constant positional relations), and logic (constant semantic relations), and physics (constant physical state relations) as they should be; formal grammars – then you are holding a double standard. Why is it that you cannot write in, speak in, think in equally logical and scientific prose? Yet it is that inability to speak in equally scientific prose that leads you to the conclusions you hold. Thereby attributing to your own state authority that cannot exist because it lacks the rigor of those grammar and semantics that you refer to with authority? Why would intellectual history be complicated? Why is the physical world (subatomic, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient) not ‘simple’ in, that like higher mathematics, forms lie groups (externalities) that limit the permutations of the underlying grammar (operations) – and then this cycle repeats itself, producing in the physical world, what we call sciences at every hierarchy of chose limits? All I have really done is state that: (a) via negativa is all that we can search for. What remains (as in markets) is a truth candidate. And we are actually quite good at falsification (criticism). (b) that the logics, sciences, and ethics serve only as via-negativa deflationary grammars (processes of continuous disambiguation) that remove ambiguity and error. (c) that the operational revolution failed in the 20th century due to lagging justificationism, and that the hard sciences adopted it, and that the law has always adhered to it, and that operational grammar serves as a deflationary grammar that falsifies (disambiguates) fictionalisms (fiction, pseudoscience, pseudo rationalism, supernaturalism. (d) that humans feel, reason, and act to acquire predictable categories, and that these categories are constant across all of us (given biases in the genders) – and without htat constancy we would not be able to empathize, and without being able to empathize, we would not be able to cooperate. I had to adapt or create a lot of terminology from all fields in order to produce an operational semantics (vocabulary) without resorting to continental ‘word fabrication’. And as such, it’s a bit unnatural and difficult to learn. But it is far better than colloquial or disciplinary vocabularies and their pretenses of knowledge – particularly their pretense of knowledge of existence. -
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly cons
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly constructed grammar) in ordinary language, yet you treat formal grammars (mathematics: constant positional relations), and logic (constant semantic relations), and physics (constant physical state relations) as they should be; formal grammars – then you are holding a double standard.
Why is it that you cannot write in, speak in, think in equally logical and scientific prose? Yet it is that inability to speak in equally scientific prose that leads you to the conclusions you hold.
Thereby attributing to your own state authority that cannot exist because it lacks the rigor of those grammar and semantics that you refer to with authority?
Why would intellectual history be complicated? Why is the physical world (subatomic, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient) not ‘simple’ in, that like higher mathematics, forms lie groups (externalities) that limit the permutations of the underlying grammar (operations) – and then this cycle repeats itself, producing in the physical world, what we call sciences at every hierarchy of chose limits?
All I have really done is state that:
(a) via negativa is all that we can search for. What remains (as in markets) is a truth candidate. And we are actually quite good at falsification (criticism).
(b) that the logics, sciences, and ethics serve only as via-negativa deflationary grammars (processes of continuous disambiguation) that remove ambiguity and error.
(c) that the operational revolution failed in the 20th century due to lagging justificationism, and that the hard sciences adopted it, and that the law has always adhered to it, and that operational grammar serves as a deflationary grammar that falsifies (disambiguates) fictionalisms (fiction, pseudoscience, pseudo rationalism, supernaturalism.
(d) that humans feel, reason, and act to acquire predictable categories, and that these categories are constant across all of us (given biases in the genders) – and without htat constancy we would not be able to empathize, and without being able to empathize, we would not be able to cooperate.
I had to adapt or create a lot of terminology from all fields in order to produce an operational semantics (vocabulary) without resorting to continental ‘word fabrication’. And as such, it’s a bit unnatural and difficult to learn.
But it is far better than colloquial or disciplinary vocabularies and their pretenses of knowledge – particularly their pretense of knowledge of existence.
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-25 12:04:00 UTC
-
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly cons
If you yourself cannot constrain yourself to operational language (strictly constructed grammar) in ordinary language, yet you treat formal grammars (mathematics: constant positional relations), and logic (constant semantic relations), and physics (constant physical state relations) as they should be; formal grammars – then you are holding a double standard. Why is it that you cannot write in, speak in, think in equally logical and scientific prose? Yet it is that inability to speak in equally scientific prose that leads you to the conclusions you hold. Thereby attributing to your own state authority that cannot exist because it lacks the rigor of those grammar and semantics that you refer to with authority? Why would intellectual history be complicated? Why is the physical world (subatomic, atomic, chemical, biological, sentient) not ‘simple’ in, that like higher mathematics, forms lie groups (externalities) that limit the permutations of the underlying grammar (operations) – and then this cycle repeats itself, producing in the physical world, what we call sciences at every hierarchy of chose limits? All I have really done is state that: (a) via negativa is all that we can search for. What remains (as in markets) is a truth candidate. And we are actually quite good at falsification (criticism). (b) that the logics, sciences, and ethics serve only as via-negativa deflationary grammars (processes of continuous disambiguation) that remove ambiguity and error. (c) that the operational revolution failed in the 20th century due to lagging justificationism, and that the hard sciences adopted it, and that the law has always adhered to it, and that operational grammar serves as a deflationary grammar that falsifies (disambiguates) fictionalisms (fiction, pseudoscience, pseudo rationalism, supernaturalism. (d) that humans feel, reason, and act to acquire predictable categories, and that these categories are constant across all of us (given biases in the genders) – and without htat constancy we would not be able to empathize, and without being able to empathize, we would not be able to cooperate. I had to adapt or create a lot of terminology from all fields in order to produce an operational semantics (vocabulary) without resorting to continental ‘word fabrication’. And as such, it’s a bit unnatural and difficult to learn. But it is far better than colloquial or disciplinary vocabularies and their pretenses of knowledge – particularly their pretense of knowledge of existence. -
–“Why Doesn’t A High Iq (Alone) Mean You’re Smart?”–
–“WHY DOESN’T A HIGH IQ (ALONE) MEAN YOU’RE SMART?”– I’ll give you the correct answer. 1 – Measured Intelligence, or Intellectual Capability is equivalent to a personality trait. There is such a high correlation between openness to experience and intelligence that this idea will go mainstream in the next decade if it has not already. Intelligence may be the most important personality trait. 2 – The remaining personality traits, (five or six factors, and ten or twelve dimensions) and their predictable gender biases, affect the application of intelligence. So like Anna Karenina’s “all healthy families are the same, and all unhealthy families are different”, or like the domestication of animals, which requires a certain combination of behaviors are present, demonstrated intelligence requires not only its presence as an ability, but the absence of traits that interfere with its expression. In other words, many things must go right, and if any one goes wrong, we do not demonstrate that intelligence (or at least do not demonstrate it beneficially). 3) So, demonstrated intelligence depends upon the following: a) What we call ‘g’, or general intelligence (which has many components but all scale together), which is a loose measure of the rate at which you accumulate information and identify patterns – the obvious differences being the female verbal and the male spatial biases in brain structure. Despite claims as far as I know, it is not possible to alter it. b) What we call ‘short term memory’ – the ability to preserve states over time (I do not possess this and am constantly aware of it) As far as I know, despite claims, it is not possible to alter it. c) General Knowledge – the totality of knowledge (information and experience) that we can draw from in identifying opportunities for patterns. (Hence why being well read and are the best things that you can do to improve your demonstrated intelligence. ) d) What we call “personality traits” that do not negatively interfere with the expression of one’s intellectual capacity/measured intelligence/g. e) And the wildcard of “beliefs and wants”. One can increase the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe, or one can decrease the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe. If you want something that is impossible, or you believe something is false, you will constantly err, and accumulate errors. The more false and impossible beliefs and wants, the more error you will accumulate. As I currently understand mankind, our primary drive is status, whether shelf image or reputation, or behavior of others toward us despite our self image and reputation. And the majority of failures of intelligence are caused by the inability to develop, or lack of training in, the mindfulness (stoicism) to judge one’s value in the markets for communication, association, friendship, productive cooperation, reproduction(family), commons production, political production, and military production. So many of us wish the world were different, and go slightly foolish, anxious, depressed, or entirely mad, because we cannot tolerate a self image that corresponds with reality. Meaning, we cannot develop a self image that accurately describes our market value to others: Our Status. Otherwise, trauma causes similar dysfunctions, since trauma forces us to work constantly to avoid activating parts of our memories ( minds, brains), via association. This becomes exhausting. Which is why hallucinogens work so effectively at allowing us to observe experiences rather than feel them, and therefore create alternative pathways and weights that allow us to circumvent those traumas (land mines). Cheers. -
DOESN’T A HIGH IQ (ALONE) MEAN YOU’RE SMART?”– I’ll give you the correct answer
https://t.co/G936Iejqs8–“WHY DOESN’T A HIGH IQ (ALONE) MEAN YOU’RE SMART?”–
I’ll give you the correct answer.
1 – Measured Intelligence, or Intellectual Capability is equivalent to a personality trait. There is such a high correlation between openness to experience and intelligence that this idea will go mainstream in the next decade if it has not already. Intelligence may be the most important personality trait.
2 – The remaining personality traits, (five or six factors, and ten or twelve dimensions) and their predictable gender biases, affect the application of intelligence.
So like Anna Karenina’s “all healthy families are the same, and all unhealthy families are different”, or like the domestication of animals, which requires a certain combination of behaviors are present, demonstrated intelligence requires not only its presence as an ability, but the absence of traits that interfere with its expression.
In other words, many things must go right, and if any one goes wrong, we do not demonstrate that intelligence (or at least do not demonstrate it beneficially).
3) So, demonstrated intelligence depends upon the following:
a) What we call ‘g’, or general intelligence (which has many components but all scale together), which is a loose measure of the rate at which you accumulate information and identify patterns – the obvious differences being the female verbal and the male spatial biases in brain structure. Despite claims as far as I know, it is not possible to alter it.
b) What we call ‘short term memory’ – the ability to preserve states over time (I do not possess this and am constantly aware of it) As far as I know, despite claims, it is not possible to alter it.
c) General Knowledge – the totality of knowledge (information and experience) that we can draw from in identifying opportunities for patterns. (Hence why being well read and are the best things that you can do to improve your demonstrated intelligence. )
d) What we call “personality traits” that do not negatively interfere with the expression of one’s intellectual capacity/measured intelligence/g.
e) And the wildcard of “beliefs and wants”. One can increase the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe, or one can decrease the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe. If you want something that is impossible, or you believe something is false, you will constantly err, and accumulate errors. The more false and impossible beliefs and wants, the more error you will accumulate.
As I currently understand mankind, our primary drive is status, whether shelf image or reputation, or behavior of others toward us despite our self image and reputation.
And the majority of failures of intelligence are caused by the inability to develop, or lack of training in, the mindfulness (stoicism) to judge one’s value in the markets for communication, association, friendship, productive cooperation, reproduction(family), commons production, political production, and military production.
So many of us wish the world were different, and go slightly foolish, anxious, depressed, or entirely mad, because we cannot tolerate a self image that corresponds with reality. Meaning, we cannot develop a self image that accurately describes our market value to others: Our Status.
Otherwise, trauma causes similar dysfunctions, since trauma forces us to work constantly to avoid activating parts of our memories ( minds, brains), via association. This becomes exhausting. Which is why hallucinogens work so effectively at allowing us to observe experiences rather than feel them, and therefore create alternative pathways and weights that allow us to circumvent those traumas (land mines).
Cheers.
Source date (UTC): 2018-02-24 12:37:00 UTC
-
–“Why Doesn’t A High Iq (Alone) Mean You’re Smart?”–
–“WHY DOESN’T A HIGH IQ (ALONE) MEAN YOU’RE SMART?”– I’ll give you the correct answer. 1 – Measured Intelligence, or Intellectual Capability is equivalent to a personality trait. There is such a high correlation between openness to experience and intelligence that this idea will go mainstream in the next decade if it has not already. Intelligence may be the most important personality trait. 2 – The remaining personality traits, (five or six factors, and ten or twelve dimensions) and their predictable gender biases, affect the application of intelligence. So like Anna Karenina’s “all healthy families are the same, and all unhealthy families are different”, or like the domestication of animals, which requires a certain combination of behaviors are present, demonstrated intelligence requires not only its presence as an ability, but the absence of traits that interfere with its expression. In other words, many things must go right, and if any one goes wrong, we do not demonstrate that intelligence (or at least do not demonstrate it beneficially). 3) So, demonstrated intelligence depends upon the following: a) What we call ‘g’, or general intelligence (which has many components but all scale together), which is a loose measure of the rate at which you accumulate information and identify patterns – the obvious differences being the female verbal and the male spatial biases in brain structure. Despite claims as far as I know, it is not possible to alter it. b) What we call ‘short term memory’ – the ability to preserve states over time (I do not possess this and am constantly aware of it) As far as I know, despite claims, it is not possible to alter it. c) General Knowledge – the totality of knowledge (information and experience) that we can draw from in identifying opportunities for patterns. (Hence why being well read and are the best things that you can do to improve your demonstrated intelligence. ) d) What we call “personality traits” that do not negatively interfere with the expression of one’s intellectual capacity/measured intelligence/g. e) And the wildcard of “beliefs and wants”. One can increase the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe, or one can decrease the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe. If you want something that is impossible, or you believe something is false, you will constantly err, and accumulate errors. The more false and impossible beliefs and wants, the more error you will accumulate. As I currently understand mankind, our primary drive is status, whether shelf image or reputation, or behavior of others toward us despite our self image and reputation. And the majority of failures of intelligence are caused by the inability to develop, or lack of training in, the mindfulness (stoicism) to judge one’s value in the markets for communication, association, friendship, productive cooperation, reproduction(family), commons production, political production, and military production. So many of us wish the world were different, and go slightly foolish, anxious, depressed, or entirely mad, because we cannot tolerate a self image that corresponds with reality. Meaning, we cannot develop a self image that accurately describes our market value to others: Our Status. Otherwise, trauma causes similar dysfunctions, since trauma forces us to work constantly to avoid activating parts of our memories ( minds, brains), via association. This becomes exhausting. Which is why hallucinogens work so effectively at allowing us to observe experiences rather than feel them, and therefore create alternative pathways and weights that allow us to circumvent those traumas (land mines). Cheers. -
Why Doesn’t A High Iq Mean You’re Smart?
I’ll give you the correct answer.
Intelligence: Capability(Potential) vs Smart: Demonstrated(Existential).
But why can Potential and Existential differ?
1 – Measured Intelligence, or Intellectual Capability is equivalent to a personality trait. There is such a high correlation between openness to experience and intelligence that this idea will go mainstream in the next decade if it has not already. Intelligence may be the most important personality trait.
2 – The remaining personality traits, (five or six factors, and ten or twelve dimensions) and their predictable gender biases, affect the application of intelligence.
So like Anna Karenina’s “all healthy families are the same, and all unhealthy families are different”, or like the domestication of animals, which requires a certain combination of behaviors are present, demonstrated intelligence requires not only its presence as an ability, but the absence of traits that interfere with its expression.
In other words, many things must go right, and if any one goes wrong, we do not demonstrate that intelligence (or at least do not demonstrate it beneficially).
3) So, demonstrated intelligence depends upon the following:
- a) What we call ‘g’, or general intelligence (which has many components but all scale together), which is a loose measure of the rate at which you accumulate information and identify patterns – the obvious differences being the female verbal and the male spatial biases in brain structure. Despite claims as far as I know, it is not possible to alter it.
- b) What we call ‘short term memory’ – the ability to preserve states over time (I do not possess this and am constantly aware of it) As far as I know, despite claims, it is not possible to alter it.
- c) General Knowledge – the totality of knowledge (information and experience) that we can draw from in identifying opportunities for patterns. (Hence why being well read and are the best things that you can do to improve your demonstrated intelligence. )
- d) What we call “personality traits” that do not negatively interfere with the expression of one’s intellectual capacity/measured intelligence/g.
- e) And the wildcard of “beliefs and wants”. One can increase the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe, or one can decrease the correspondence of one’s thoughts with the universe. If you want something that is impossible, or you believe something is false, you will constantly err, and accumulate errors. The more false and impossible beliefs and wants, the more error you will accumulate.
Explanation: “Status”
As I currently understand mankind, our primary drive is status, whether shelf image or reputation, or behavior of others toward us despite our self image and reputation.
And the majority of failures of intelligence are caused by the inability to develop, or lack of training in, the mindfulness (stoicism) to judge one’s value in the markets for communication, association, friendship, productive cooperation, reproduction(family), commons production, political production, and military production.
So many of us wish the world were different, and go slightly foolish, anxious, depressed, or entirely mad, because we cannot tolerate a self image that corresponds with reality. Meaning, we cannot develop a self image that accurately describes our market value to others: Our Status.
Otherwise, trauma causes similar dysfunctions, since trauma forces us to work constantly to avoid activating parts of our memories ( minds, brains), via association. This becomes exhausting. Which is why hallucinogens work so effectively at allowing us to observe experiences rather than feel them, and therefore create alternative pathways and weights that allow us to circumvent those traumas (land mines).
Cheers.
Curt Doolittle
The Propertarian Institute
Kiev, Ukrainehttps://www.quora.com/Why-doesnt-a-high-IQ-mean-youre-smart