Curt Doolittle

Theme: Operationalism

  • Lets start with defining a number. A number consists of a positional name. The n

    Lets start with defining a number. A number consists of a positional name. The name of a position in an order. Positional Naming using positional numbers assisted us in creating positional names beyond our ability to remember names, and beyond our ability to conceive or compare.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-14 17:11:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973969848035311619

    Reply addressees: @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973969391560863745

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman But that does not mean that while the categories relations and values that they discuss in mathematics cannot be restated in scientific “true” operational prose. It’s just that when you do so the triviality of mathematics and the pseudoscientific content of the prose is obvious.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/973969391560863745

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman But that does not mean that while the categories relations and values that they discuss in mathematics cannot be restated in scientific “true” operational prose. It’s just that when you do so the triviality of mathematics and the pseudoscientific content of the prose is obvious.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/973969391560863745

  • But that does not mean that while the categories relations and values that they

    But that does not mean that while the categories relations and values that they discuss in mathematics cannot be restated in scientific “true” operational prose. It’s just that when you do so the triviality of mathematics and the pseudoscientific content of the prose is obvious.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-14 17:09:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973969391560863745

    Reply addressees: @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973969091013771264

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman And so just as metalsmiths talked about spirits, astrologers talked about gods and demigods, theologians talked about god and heaven, mathematicians still make use of archaic ‘fictionalist’ (platonic) prose as did astrologers and theologians.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/973969091013771264

    IN REPLY TO:

    @curtdoolittle

    @ProfessorLarp @GolfNorman And so just as metalsmiths talked about spirits, astrologers talked about gods and demigods, theologians talked about god and heaven, mathematicians still make use of archaic ‘fictionalist’ (platonic) prose as did astrologers and theologians.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/973969091013771264

  • “…naturalistic fallacy…”— I don’t commit naturalistic fallacies – which st

    —“…naturalistic fallacy…”— I don’t commit naturalistic fallacies – which states that we must do something because it is present in nature. I simply describe what we do, as evidence we already mirror natural processes. The only moral rule is reciprocity (do not unto others). The pretense-of-kinship fallacy, is that we are obligated to redistribution and cooperation, rather than ‘cooperation is only valuable until it is not. you aren’t my associate, my friend, my kin, my people, and therefore you are only valuable to me as a trading partner and then only so if you are a productive trading partner. Otherwise you are just a competitor for resources. And I always have the choice of avoidance of your parasitism, trade, or predation upon you. And your argument is that you should be able to parasitically extract from me and mine. That is all you are doing. Pretense of kinship or partner, when you are merely seeking rents (parasitism). Your argument is testable. Sorry. It just is. All human argument is reducible to some transfer.

  • Jury > Tort > Reason > Logic > Rationalism > Empiricism >Science >Operational Sc

    Jury > Tort > Reason > Logic > Rationalism > Empiricism >Science >Operational Science has been opposed with Priesthood > Astrology/Numerology > Scriptural Religion > Idealism > Pilpul > Rabbinical Judaism(christ/islam) > Augustinianism > Kantian Rationalism > Pseudoscience.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-12 13:51:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973194799116414976

    Reply addressees: @nathancofnas

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/972432694675058688

    IN REPLY TO:

    @nathancofnas

    My analysis of Kevin MacDonald’s pseudoscience: https://t.co/eRfp6B8g0e

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/972432694675058688

  • 19 – You on the other hand, criticize him for pseudoscience but you rely not upo

    19 – You on the other hand, criticize him for pseudoscience but you rely not upon science (dimensional falsification through measurement and exposition in operational language), but upon pseudo-rationalism : critique (gossip, shaming, rallying). The very technique he illustrates.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-12 12:33:42 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/973175197296615424

    Reply addressees: @nathancofnas

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/972432694675058688

    IN REPLY TO:

    @nathancofnas

    My analysis of Kevin MacDonald’s pseudoscience: https://t.co/eRfp6B8g0e

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/972432694675058688

  • TRUTH HAS ONLY ONE POSSIBLE MEANING There is only one possible meaning of truth:

    TRUTH HAS ONLY ONE POSSIBLE MEANING

    There is only one possible meaning of truth: the spectrum honesty(unwarranted) > testimony(warranted) > most parsimonious operational name(unwarrantable). Conflating the preferable, the good, the decidable, the true, is just a means of lying – it is merely a sophisticated method by which to employ an appeal to authority by platonic means. It’s an excuse for self congratulatory fraud.

    People will make excuses.

    They favor their excuses.

    They disfavor the excuses of others.

    That’s why we have courts, science, and measurement – to decide independent of excuses.

    We need only incrementally improve the courts so that we suppress excuses just as we have every other form of violence, theft, and fraud.

    NO MORE LIES, NO MORE FRAUD, NO MORE PRETENSE.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-12 08:57:00 UTC

  • Truth Has Only One Possible Meaning

    There is only one possible meaning of truth: the spectrum honesty(unwarranted) > testimony(warranted) > most parsimonious operational name(unwarrantable). Conflating the preferable, the good, the decidable, the true, is just a means of lying – it is merely a sophisticated method by which to employ an appeal to authority by platonic means. It’s an excuse for self congratulatory fraud. People will make excuses. They favor their excuses. They disfavor the excuses of others. That’s why we have courts, science, and measurement – to decide independent of excuses. We need only incrementally improve the courts so that we suppress excuses just as we have every other form of violence, theft, and fraud. NO MORE LIES, NO MORE FRAUD, NO MORE PRETENSE.

  • Truth Has Only One Possible Meaning

    There is only one possible meaning of truth: the spectrum honesty(unwarranted) > testimony(warranted) > most parsimonious operational name(unwarrantable). Conflating the preferable, the good, the decidable, the true, is just a means of lying – it is merely a sophisticated method by which to employ an appeal to authority by platonic means. It’s an excuse for self congratulatory fraud. People will make excuses. They favor their excuses. They disfavor the excuses of others. That’s why we have courts, science, and measurement – to decide independent of excuses. We need only incrementally improve the courts so that we suppress excuses just as we have every other form of violence, theft, and fraud. NO MORE LIES, NO MORE FRAUD, NO MORE PRETENSE.

  • What is the difference between imaginable, logical, empirical and operational? E

    What is the difference between imaginable, logical, empirical and operational? Each tests the prior’s claims.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-11 11:20:00 UTC

  • What is the difference between imaginable, logical, empirical and operational? E

    What is the difference between imaginable, logical, empirical and operational? Each tests the prior’s claims.