Curt Doolittle

Theme: Measurement

  • Umm… Countries (esp NW European) always report higher satisfaction and happine

    Umm… Countries (esp NW European) always report higher satisfaction and happiness that is not evident outside out self-reporting (bias). The most well known example is any of the Scandinavian countries, but Denmark in particular, where it is considered very bad manners, and possibly heretical to say otherwise.

    The first rule of social science is that all self-reported surveys are false. Almost none replicate EXCEPT those that are false. Unless we have evidence of demonstrated behavior, all self-reporting is just virtue signaling. Worse, women may not be able to distinguish between what they say, what they feel, and what they demonstrate by their behavior – because they are often opposites for well documented reasons of differences in fear and in responsibility for the commons.

    Reply addressees: @EPoe187

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-03 18:21:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687166872913866752

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1686722813699248129

  • If I may ask one more question? Ok. Let’s assume the data is not improved; it’s

    If I may ask one more question?
    Ok. Let’s assume the data is not improved; it’s just been redesigned to look good. And let’s assume that the problem of data-lag confronting central banks hasn’t improved.
    But (and we’re both old enough to remember this), in previous contractions, wasn’t there was less awareness and concern spread across the economy, and more optimism?
    So isn’t there a decrease in the ‘animal spirits’ that cause rapid shifts that cause shocks that spiral?
    I was conscious of the 80s banking crisis, the early 90s recession, of the 2001 obvious problem of malinvestment, and of the 2008 obvious debt problems. All of these events were roughly predictable and obvious, but optimism and wishful thinking seemed to persist in the broader population. I don’t really see that right now.
    We know that in general the more aware people are of a risk the more likely they are to counter it assuming the incentive isn’t overwhelming – this is one of the reasons some predictions don’t manifest.
    So do you observe this same behavior or, at least from your vantage point, do you see ‘same old, same old once again’?

    Reply addressees: @VelenskiMeir

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-01 19:16:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1686455874347221002

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1686441575021207552

  • Yes. We teach this ordinal math (The Method) but we havent found a process for d

    Yes. We teach this ordinal math (The Method) but we havent found a process for doing so that doesnt take years and require a certain personality type.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-28 06:53:03 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684819238861623296

    Reply addressees: @VelenskiMeir

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684817084872540160

  • (interesting) Simple solution to the peoblem of the copula? –“We can clarify a

    (interesting)
    Simple solution to the peoblem of the copula?

    –“We can clarify a lot of this confusion by simply referring to “=“ as “gets”, i.e. an assignment operation. As such, this operation can only succeed if the left and right side operant belongs to the same class, i.e. type. Otherwise for a computer system incapable of operating under ambiguous conditions, the statement will fail to compile let alone execute.

    If instead of “gets”, we choose to use the word “is”, it create a loop hole for false equivalency. “x = int(1)” then translates to “x is the integer 1”, which does not always evaluate to true, since you falsify the statement as soon as you execute “x=int(2)”.

    Further more, if the operands belong to two distinct classes, especially ones that do not share enough in common such that you can type cast one into the other, using the copula “is” can create ambiguities. The statement “She is a man” constitutes such an ambiguity. Grammatically correct (the sentence parses), yet semantically false, and certainly fails the truth test. To use the programming analogy: one can not assign an instance of a type human male to a variable of type human female.

    In summary, I think that not all use of “to be” leads to ambiguity and lies, but because a substantial subset of its usage does causes ambiguity through false equivalence, those of us striving to operate in truthful ways stand a better chance of success by avoiding its usage.”– Francis

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-28 03:25:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684766978794192897

  • You shouldn’t try to use E-Prime in daily language. It’s just a strict grammar –

    You shouldn’t try to use E-Prime in daily language. It’s just a strict grammar – just as programming or mathematics require strict grammars. The point is to use it enough, either in writing or just in mind, so that you begin to understand when you’re speaking clearly and coherently, and when not. Use it to internalize operational prose. If you do you will, in general, speak, and most importantly think more clearly, and communicate better, and even better, identify when people are “talking shite” even when they don’t know they are.

    Reply addressees: @costelloe_w

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-27 15:14:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684583122543804422

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684562745918988288

  • via Moritz Bierling and Martin Stepan “And to be clear, e-prime is only a traini

    via Moritz Bierling and Martin Stepan

    “And to be clear, e-prime is only a training tool to provide an onramp to operationalization, serialization, enumeration, etc. It doesn’t actually give you operationalization “right out the box”

    When you integrate it into subconscious like we have, if you can, you won’t say things that cannot be operationalized, even when you don’t use operational language directly.

    This is what Curt means when he says that how we speak looks like English but “is” actually math with words

    That only works because English was already pretty close.”

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-27 13:28:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1684556479611768832

  • Stupid question: If instead of dark matter they referred to it as dark gravity (

    Stupid question: If instead of dark matter they referred to it as dark gravity (because that’s what they’re referring to) would we be as critical of them?

    Easier to be critical of them if we simply accept that modified newtonian gravity solves the problem, and leaves it up to physicists to explain why it’s so.

    IMO there are a lot of ‘naming’ problems in math, physics, and behavioral science that if corrected make the subjects less nonsense-sounding.

    For all intents and purposes math and physics and somewhat in epistemology and certainly in behavioral sciences, there is a tendency to preserve nonsense names (non descriptive, non-operational) for concepts that essentially reduce them to cult dogmas.

    Reply addressees: @JohnSeb68347289

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-24 19:11:18 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1683555472844939264

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1683551799670878210

  • Very articulate. Evolutionary Hierarchy: Embodiment > Anthropomorphism (naming)

    Very articulate.
    Evolutionary Hierarchy:
    Embodiment > Anthropomorphism (naming) > Mythology(counting) > Theology(arithmetic) > Philosophy(Geometry) > Empiricism (Natural Philosophy, Algebra) > Science (testimony, Calculus) > Operationalism (Computation,Simulation).

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-23 11:15:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1683073302225379330

    Reply addressees: @JonBear48176174

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1682479187414724609

  • I did my first serious philosophical work ‘sciencing’ art criticism by creating

    I did my first serious philosophical work ‘sciencing’ art criticism by creating an analytic model for disambiguatin and measurement by triangulation as a solution to the problem of overcoming bias in teaching art hisory and theory. I’m not confident that its possible – especially with the fall of Yale – that such education is possible any longer. meaning the world is dependent on independent scholars of art and history to counter the war by the “march through the institutions of cultural production” undermining the western demand for individual responsibility for improving the world for having lived in it, by the heroic duty of truth, excellence and beauty produced as our legacy of the hand of man in the transformation of nature’s disorder into a garden of order as a monument to the potential virtue of mankind, as we into the gods we imagine – those that are better than those that we have.

    Reply addressees: @ArtyArtHistory

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-23 02:41:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1682944095390449665

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1682937917625311234

  • Thought: Externalities via mathematics. Euclid all positive – european physical

    Thought: Externalities via mathematics.
    Euclid all positive – european physical vs oriental verbal math
    Descart restores – physical from the oritental verbal.
    Cantor, Bohr, Einstein – Restore the verbal oriental, and cause math and physics to abandon european physical math. There are no infinities just greater or lesser operational rates, einstein’s pictures abandoned maxwell to hilbert, Bohr doubles down on mathematical verbalism. The rest is the stagnation of physics as a consequence.

    Small differences in metaphysics produce vast differences in potential incremental innovation. In particular favoring mathematical narratives vs physical operations prevents potential for abduction, induction and deduction as well as falsification of those mathematical claims.

    There is no evidence of inconsistency at any of all scales of the universe, and the present mathematical platonism entrenched by cantor, einstein, bohr have trained generations to abandon mathematical naturalism (materialism). Hence stagnation.

    Unfortunately progress will occur as usual with tombstones.

    Reply addressees: @charlesmurray

    Source date (UTC): 2023-07-20 19:07:37 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1682104996219744256

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1682033879685947392