Q: What does ‘logic’ mean in item 7 below?
Dimension by Scale:
1. Sex
2. Age > Generation > Lineage
3. Family > Clan > Tribe > Nation > Race
4. Class > Culture > Ethnicity > [Sub Civ] > Civilization
5. Society > Polity > State > Federation > Empire
6. Behavior > Norm > Tradition > Institution
7. Language > Tactics > ‘~Logic’ > Mythology > Metaphysics > Group Evolutionary Strategy.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-15 23:44:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1626004512644247552
Q: DO ABSTRACT OBJECTS EXIST?
(Philosophy)
Given: Existance = Persistence
Whereas;
… 1. Patterns of constant relations exist, for the simple reason that the universe and all in it, is constructed of a vast, hierarchy of stable (constant, persistent) relations that requires energy (change) to change state (alter those persistent, stable, relations).
… 2. Humans identify those patterns as fragments, parts, objects, spaces, and backgrounds.
… 3. Humans combine those patterns into episodes of objects, spaces and backgrounds.
… 4. Humans identify patterns between episodes and their constituent parts
… 5. Humans predict by auto association futures of episodes, and their parts, Objects in relation to one another, or objects an their parts. etc.
… 6. This predictive capacity results over time in categorizing Episodes, objects, relations, and properties into generalizations we call categories of ‘marginally indifferent relations’.
… 7. We then repeat the process with these categories.
… 8. This process scales into imagination, fictionalism, fiction, story-making, sequence-making (pathfinding), etc.
And Whereas;
… 9. Human memory stores the hierarchy of these predictive sequences and resulting patterns through repetition (both temporarily and then especially during the first sleep cycle).
… 10. These relations are then re-constructed from memory whenever stimulation is provided to the network of stored sequences – always by auto-association.
Therefore;
…11. Abstract objects in any sense (a) require human sense, perception, prediction, episoding, indexing, and memory. (b) must be reconstructed every time they are referenced, just like running must be reconstructed by the movement of the legs. (c) even if recorded by some symbols or marks, must be reconstructed by sense perception using from the symbols or marks.
… 12. As such abstract objects have the potential to exist (persist), but must always be constructed (reconstructed).
… 13. Any other claims is a word game. Whether we call that word game an analogy, sophistry, a pseudoscience, or a lie is merely the paradigm with which it’s stated and the consequence of the utterance.
-Fin-
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-15 00:12:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1625649157355499522
πππ ππππππππ
(π΄ πΊππππππ: ππππππππ, π£πππππ’ππππ¦, πππππ, πππππππ, πππ π π¦ππ‘ππ₯)
My work on the method, language and grammars, on ternary logic, sex differences, and trifunctionalism, testimonial truth, and reciprocity, on group evolutionary strategies, and in particular western group strategy – creating universal commensurability and falsifiability is all valuable. And of course the formal logic and science of law that applies it to our government in our defense is the application of that science.
They’re all major improvements to human thought. And my work is just one aspect of that major leap in human thought that’s finally emerging from the computational revolution (Despite being 100 years behind because of Babbage’s failure to generalize it.)
But, every single day, it’s increasingly obvious, that just KNOWING the grammars exist – and The Grammars of denying, lying, and undermining in particular – would have more impact on the general population’s understanding than the rest of my work.
So, while the 20th century, at least the postwar to the present, has consisted of a ‘new age of mysticism’ in math and the sciences, (culminating in neo-marxism, postmodern, feminism, pc, and woke) even if we’ve benefitted from applied science of the prewar era, what we are finally seeing, is the reversal of that new age mysticism as computation(operational realism) replaces mathematics(verbal idealism).
All we can do is hope that we succeed in our work and therefore end this new ‘cult’ religion and its threat of a new dark age of truth suppression equal or worse than the Christian and Muslim destructions of the ancient world civilizations.
I have the natural foolish European optimism of man that is inherent (metaphysical presumption ) in the western Indo-European tradition whether Greek, Roman, Germanic, Nordic, or anglosphere.
So I see a solution to the conflict between the new Luddite religion of the Marxist-to-woke academy and the state. But is it possible to purge a degenerate religion like marxism-to-woke from our institutions without civil war and the destruction it produces? Or is it possible to educate our people into making a choice and merely prohibiting that religion and institutionalizing our new understanding of the universe and ourselves as the law, and therefore prohibiting all religions that promise miracles in reality vs after death?
I know it’s possible to teach The Grammars, and it’s no harder than a program of Schoolhouse Rock. And that seems like a small political price to pay for avoiding a new dark age, that has every possibility of becoming the Great Filter – and our end.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-14 18:51:27 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1625568419801141259
I mean, what’s the problem with most ‘complexity’? We have no method for accounting before computers, lots of memory, bayesian categorizing and prediction, that can measure and reduce to analogy to experience. I mean, mathematical reducibility, computational reducibility, cognitive reducibility is the same freaking problem: how to make it simple enough for us to ‘compare’.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-14 17:32:16 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1625548491966627844
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1625543426199650305
P-LAW AND THE VERITASIUM ELECTRICITY DEBATE.
Just a note that this author in this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=–v5BXmFYv4 … uses the P-Law method of operationalization and serialization to illustrate disambiguation by use of the: [Electricity] Antenna > Capacitor > Wire sequence.β¦
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-12 20:32:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624869009823768578
P-LAW AND THE VERITASIUM ELECTRICITY DEBATE.
Just a note that this author in this video: https://t.co/MTa3Kf8Al1 … uses the P-Law method of operationalization and serialization to illustrate disambiguation by use of the: [Electricity] Antenna > Capacitor > Wire sequence. Meaning the answer is “in every way possible” – which is the answer to pretty much every question in each generation of the hierarchy of sciences. (Especially neuroscience.)
So the confusion IMO was created by the typical means by which all pseudo-conundrums are created in philosophy (sophistry) and academy (pseudoscience(: by asking for a single solution instead of the spectrum of solutions to the problem.
And thereby not solving the principle cognitive problem plaguing modern thought: one-ness, ideal types, ideals, instead of equilibria producing stable relations.
This is, as I often criticize, the problem of framing a question as a means of suggestion that produces ignorance and error as a consequence. When instead we should habituate students, and citizens, into serialization of possible solutions until they have at least the “three points necessary to test a line”, not just in geometry but in everything we do.
This also explains how education seeking right answers instead of a sequence or spectrum of answers produces ignorance in modernity, despite it’s utility in the 3R’s under the simple cognitive load of agrarianism.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-12 20:32:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624869009584685057
P-Law and the Veritasium Electricity Debate.
Just a note that this author in this video: https://t.co/MTa3Kf8Al1 … uses the P-Law method of operationalization and serialization to illustrate disambiguation by use of the: [Electricity] Antenna > Capacitor > Wire sequence. Meaning the answer is “in every way possible” – which is the answer to pretty much every question in each generation of the hierarchy of sciences. (Especially neuroscience.)
So the confusion IMO was created by the typical means by which all pseudo-conundrums are created in philosophy (sophistry) and academy (pseudoscience(: by asking for a single solution instead of the spectrum of solutions to the problem.
And thereby not solving the principle cognitive problem plaguing modern thought: one-ness, ideal types, ideals, instead of equilibria producing stable relations.
This is, as I often criticize, the problem of framing a question as a means of suggestion that produces ignorance and error as a consequence. When instead we should habituate students, and citizens, into serialization of possible solutions until they have at least the “three points necessary to test a line”, not just in geometry but in everything we do.
This also explains how education seeking right answers instead of a sequence or spectrum of answers produces ignorance in modernity, despite it’s utility in the 3R’s under the simple cognitive load of agrarianism.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-12 20:31:47 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624868894375567371
Not if you write in long chains of causal relations, using enumeration and serialization, in operational prose, because that’s the whole point of what you’re doing: writing equations that are unambiguous.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-11 00:51:05 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624209374607470592
Reply addressees: @tysonmaly
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624208601085517824
Outlier or example of the center of a distribution?
Generals are an interesting study FWIW.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-10 20:53:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624149541279653906
Reply addressees: @TabbyTeamster
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624147178393374748
10. That’s enough for now. Let’s see if anyone can follow before continuing into “all language is measurement that includes different dimensions, but there are a limited number of dimensions to human sense-perception”.
Source date (UTC): 2023-02-10 16:04:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624076913776918528
Reply addressees: @BretWeinstein
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1624072660610162692
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
@BretWeinstein Brett,(all)
1. What can we testify to? Realism, Naturalism, Identity, Consistency, Constructability, Correspondence, Rational Choice, Reciprocity, Completeness, Full Accounting and as a consequence Coherence.
2. w/Constructability from irreducible first principles the challenge.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1624072660610162692