Theme: Measurement

  • DEMONSTRATED INTELLIGENCE The brain is relatively simple operationally. Neurons

    DEMONSTRATED INTELLIGENCE
    The brain is relatively simple operationally. Neurons are quite individually simple, but can produce profound complexity in combination, in layers that peform different functinos, in microcolumns that are the primary processing unit, and and nerual colums tha combine them, and brain regions that connect to one another.
    Neural performance follows the same formula as undersea cables (and all cables for that matter) so the combination of neural organization, neural development, balance between white and grey matter, resulting resistance, and available resources (chemical balance, or health) determine how successful are ‘computations’, connections, durability, and therefore pattern development and memory.
    So IQ is a measure of generalized neural response time by testing a series of faculties divided by age to compensate for the fact that we tend to learn more with age. These tests include subtests for pattern recogition and learned knowlege and the intersection of both.
    There is a slight difference in the organization (development and interconnections) in male and female brains. First, bilateral creatures with bilaterial brains must find a means of decision making (priority) in order to time actions. Second the means of doing so has evolved largely to reflect male predator over time and bias to the empirical prediction of environmental state, vs female prey in time (empathizing) and bias to interpersonal prediction of emotional state.
    This results in the feminine empathizing/verbal vs the masculine systematizing/spatial, and the female hyperconsumptive in time and male hypercapitalizing over time – both of which reflect needs of the reproductive strategy of each (female her offspring) male (brothers and cousins and their territorial resources and collection of females and their offspring).
    And it also results in masculine pursuit of responsibility for commons in order to obtain status despite risks, and female pursuit of hyperconsumption and irresponisiblity for commons by creating demands from men, as a means of evading risk.
    The result is that men invent everything of consequence other than children, and women in politics has been a catastrophe, even if women in the economy has been beneficial.
    Now all of us get better at what challenges and fulfills us without causing us to fail. Ergo despite IQ improving learning times, people with different IQ’s pursue interests that vary so that they satisfy challenge and fulfillment to the best of theire ability and opportunity.
    And so the guy with a 105 IQ that fixes cars is going to be better at it over time than the guy who fixes or advances complex mathematical formulae. Because both would fail at one another’s jobs. The lower IQ at the ability, and the higher IQ at interst.
    Ergo DEMONSTRATED INTELLIGENCE is like applied science: it’s how you apply the resources of your intelligence and knowledge successfully or not.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @Barbarian_Brain @dosontheshinshi @MudKevin


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-17 19:40:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670154542493605890

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1670148964333617153

  • TERMINOLOGY There no conflict between the sets of terms we use in different cont

    TERMINOLOGY
    There no conflict between the sets of terms we use in different contexts, whether the long form for ordinary language or the formal short form we take from the logic of computation for the sake of brevity. We can use both for The Natural Law Project.

    Ordinary Language………Formal Language
    Natural Method ……………..P-Method
    Natural First Principles ….P-Science
    Natural Logic…………………..P-Logic
    Natural Order(Hoppe, informal)
    Natural Law…………………….P-Law (NLI Formal)
    Natural Government………P-Government
    Natural Religion
    Natural Aesthetics

    We also use the following terms to address the traditional disciplines in philosophy:
    Physics:……………………Physics: evolutionary computation of negative entropy.
    Metaphysics:…………….Vitruvianism: Man is the measure of all things man (cog. sci.)
    Psychology: ……………..Acquisitionism: Man acquires and defends.
    Ethics and Morality:…..Propertarianism. (Reciprocity) The Ethics of Non Imposition, production, and investment.
    Epistemology: ………….Testimonialism. The competition between imaginary associations and existential measurements in all dimensions of actionable reality.
    Law: ………………………..(Algorithmic) Natural Law.  The Natural Law of Reciprocity. Strictly constructed from the test of reciprocity.
    Sociology: ………………..Compatibilism: Intertemporal division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy wherein we combine information and calculate compatible means to the achievement of different ends through voluntary conflict, competition, cooperation, and boycott.
    Politics: ……………………Markets in Everything.
    Strategy:………………… Agency: Maximization of agency through Transcendence, Sovereignty, and Heroism
    Spirituality:………………Transcendence: Masculine Stoicism, Feminine Epicureanism, Ritual Familialism, Feast Naturalism, Festival Nationalism.
    Aesthetics:……………….,Truth(Testimonial), Excellence(Density), Goodness(Morality[‘the commons’]) and Beauty(Bounty).
    Constitution …………….A Second American Constitution
    Revolution………………..The Course and Conduct of a Revolution

    -Cheers

    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-15 17:56:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669403581227646984

  • Everyone wants to define The Work by what they find important in it. What’s impo

    Everyone wants to define The Work by what they find important in it. What’s important in the work is universal commensurable, value netural, decidability. The rest is application of that decidability to the scope of human knowledge and experience. The most present and urgent application is the resolution of the conflict stared by the second abrahamic revolution, this time by pseudoscience instead of supernaturalism. Unfortunately given the introduction of women in to economy and polity, and given women are biased to magical thinking and hyperconsumption and evasion of responsibility for the commons, then between the left and the pool of easily captured women, this speudoscience is as hard to stop as christian religion was hard to stop, because women both want it and there is a population of beta males desirous of the following of those women.

    Reply addressees: @WalterIII @ThruTheHayes


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-14 15:42:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1669007321853317120

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668846049799344128

  • Q: “Curt: What is the unit of account according to which the spectrum of demonst

    Q: “Curt: What is the unit of account according to which the spectrum of demonstrated interests is commensurable? Pricing these areas of dispute doesn’t seem to be an exact science.”

    Great question.

    There are no utils nor prices in subjective value – just voluntary reciprocity or not. This is because time is the universal asset of scarcity, and time is of different value at different times in different circumstances to each of us. And all demonstrated interests (from concrete to abstract objects) store different amounts of relative time. This is the reason for subjective value and the variation in subjective value by time, place, individual, and his inventory.

    So the only means of testing value is voluntary transfer (exchange). Because all individuals use personal weights and measures. As such it’s the ACTION(change) of exchange not the STATE of the asset or demonstrated interests that provides us with information.

    All we know is that people seek to acquire, preserve, transform, trade, and consume demonstrated interests as a means of defeating entropy in time.

    So we can catalog demonstrated interest by empirical observation(we have). Because people seek to acquire and defend demonstrated interests. And they seek restitution, punishment and prevention of those demonstrated interests when that interest is violated. In other words this is a purely empirical (scientific) question. (Empirical means observable and recordable).

    And we can observe that all human behavior is reducible to statements of acquiring, preserving, transforming, exchanging, and consuming demonstrated interests.

    So contrary to Utils and Prices, which are cardinal measures, human behavior is measured ordinally by ordinal name (term, not number), and determined by triangulation, not cardinal position or number.

    And cardinal measures such as prices are the floating measure of relative value in markets (populations) of distributed interest in goods, services, information, or opportunity, whether private, semi-private, or common.

    Prices only aggregate a distribution of the value of time to individuals that produces a voluntary exchange, and not a universal value or absolute measure of anything.

    Reply addressees: @godotnik


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-13 20:16:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668713902325092355

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1668700012442779649

  • The Natural Law Institute The Science of Cooperation A universally commensurable

    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation
    A universally commensurable, value-neutral, formal operational logic of decidability within and across all disciplines, by the science and logic of evolutionary computation of the incremental defeat of entropy, and in turn,…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-10 20:08:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1667624892269830147

  • RT @DustinofApollon: @curtdoolittle The algorithm doesn’t seem to measure and re

    RT @DustinofApollon: @curtdoolittle The algorithm doesn’t seem to measure and reward people for adjusting someone’s perspective as much as…


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-09 17:57:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1667229381209595906

  • Now define sacredness. 😉 As far as I know Gods are always and everywhere system

    Now define sacredness. 😉
    As far as I know Gods are always and everywhere systems of behavioral measurement. What does the sacred have to do with those systems of measurement (standards of weights and measures)?


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-07 17:53:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1666503621708591104

    Reply addressees: @zmb_bllbry_mffn

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1666502083183509504

  • CORRECT: Anthropomorphism of nature into gods, spirits, etc, is the cheapest, mo

    CORRECT: Anthropomorphism of nature into gods, spirits, etc, is the cheapest, most lossless, and most functional compression of information available to man.
    Enumeration of the rules requires more work, but allows for greater precision in answering more complex questions as our… https://twitter.com/Helium_He3/status/1666498331869347841


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-07 17:37:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1666499594530766848

  • “Q: WHY DO YOU DEFINE ALL TERMS IN A SERIES?” (ordinal mathematics) Do you remem

    “Q: WHY DO YOU DEFINE ALL TERMS IN A SERIES?”
    (ordinal mathematics)

    Do you remember in geometry class, the teacher explained how three points test a line? And the more points you test that appear on that line the more valid the formula for the line?

    A line constitutes a dimension of measurement. Points on that line are definitions that are consistent with that dimension. In other words, we are certain that those points, all of which are on a line, share the same properties: the same properties of that dimension.

    So, that’s why we use ‘disambiguation by enumeration (listing), serialization (putting them on a line in an order), and operationalization (describing them as actions, and actions as common properties), where those common properties define the dimension(s) we’re measuring.

    So, in our canonical example:
    |Moral|: Evil – Immoral – Unethical – Amoral – Ethical – Moral – Virtuous.
    Given moral value refers to deviation from reciprocity.
    Therefore we define the dimension of morality using four properties: Limits(Evil-to-Virtuous), Directness-Indirectness, Severity, and Intention(evil requires intent)

    So instead of ‘cardinal mathematics’ (numbers) we call this ‘ordinal mathematics’. Meaning that we can use triangulation of terms to determine the order, producing an unambiguous series of measurements, and the properties we are measuring, so that we prevent ourselves and other from ignorance, error, bias, and deceit by denial, evasion, inflation and conflation.

    So just as you decide 4 of something is greater than 3 and less than 5 of it, you decide by this same ‘triangulation’ (Sesame street game) that morality is more indirect(anonymous) than ethics, but less so than virtue.

    So, while numbers are names of positions, and our terms are names of positions, in this sense, our terms like numbers, represent only an order in a measurement. Unlike numbers they do not necessarily require the same scale between them. And again unlike numbers, or more correctly, unlike numbers on the same scale, they are not commensurable any more than time (minutes) and space (miles) are commensurable: the second or third position on a given ordinal sequence does not reflect the second or third position on a different ordinal sequence. This is because we are measuring different *dimensions* and dimensions represent one or more causes.

    I hope this helps
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-06 15:28:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1666104800642052100

  • THE LONG HOUSE MEME AND MATRILINEARITY PATRILIEARITY VS MATRIARCHY AND PATRIARCH

    THE LONG HOUSE MEME AND MATRILINEARITY PATRILIEARITY VS MATRIARCHY AND PATRIARCHY

    Much of my (our) work depends on ‘disambiguation into unambiguous measures’

    It’s not matriarchal. It’s matrilineal. Meaning that it’s the most primitive agrarian (and late to post-hunter-gatherer) family structure, consisting of all those birthed by a woman, her mother, her sisters, and defended by uncles and brothers. Cohabitation, if it exists, varies from one direction to the other.

    There is no ‘risk or trust’ required in this family structure. Where uncles and brothers ‘inseminate’ women in other matrilineal households, but maintain the workload in their own families, or share the work between the two. Why? Because men and women live very separate lives. Men are external to the household, and women are internal to the household. And because the concept of ‘individual’ hadn’t arisen because the capacity to survive outside of a family structure was impossible. And we, as products of the West, the Enlightenment, and the industrial revolution, have a hard time envisioning that paradigm of existence.

    Matriarchy is impossible since all disputes are eventually resolved by force, as the lowest common denominator of dispute resolution.

    Patrilineality is an innovation over Matrilineality because (a) scale, (b) property inheritance and especially the prohibition on dividing land and weakening the family in relation to others and (c) the increase in per person productivity – creating opportunity for independence, and increase in freedom of choice, (d) and the increasing dependence on warriors for defense of higher-value territory and resources.

    So i) Patriarchy always exists everywhere, and ii) patrilineality always arises from matrilineality, producing iii) patriarchy and patrilineality except in temporary conditions where the majority of men have been killed in war, but there are no present existential war threats that cause demand for males – usually because the territory women and assets aren’t worth conquering and taxing/tithing/tributing.

    So let’s not conflate:
    Agrarian Patriarchy (Male Head of Household(assets) > headman > chieftain > king > monarch > emperor > (complex government)
    With:
    Pre-agrarian ‘family’ (limited to prohibition on reproduction with offspring) > matrinlineality > patrilineality.

    And let’s not assume that the future, if we have one, will fit either of those models. When it certainly appear that we will, as in all things, diverge into family structures that represent class structures because class structures roughly represent adaptability, and durable relations require paying costs of adaptability – good of the common – over the good of the self, by all parties in the relationship.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute

    Reply addressees: @Logos_Elect @Hail__To_You


    Source date (UTC): 2023-06-04 17:26:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1665409720742494209

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1665350947462062080