Curt Doolittle

Theme: Operationalism

  • Magic And God And Frames

    –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic? People either measure through high context (not magic) low precision, or construe low context to look like high context so as to pretend the first (magic). Those who can ‘measure’ through low context, high precision can explain what they are doing, but the audience mostly can’t grok it… so they try use the audience’s language: high context, low precision.”— Mea Culba 1 – You are correct, but the terminology is ‘high context low precision’ vs ‘high precision, low context’. (I’ve modified your prose to make use of those terms instead) 2 – technically speaking there are very few grammars available to man. And the grammar of ‘magic’ is used to ascribe cause or intent to that which is not understood. So combining fiction and magic, we get religion. Adding law gets us monotheism. 3 – people can be spoken to in the language of analogy, parable, and fiction, without engaging in lying (religion). We all defend our frames. The abrahamic lies have affected all but the far east. It took me a long time to understand the damage caused by abrahamism (lying). And it’s because people are so vulnerable to that form of lying, that it’s been so dangerous and destructive. Abrahamism combines lying and conflation into not only monotheism but a monopoly frame. This is terribly simple for the human mind. It is also, because it does NOT consist of competition, a PRISON for the human mind. (BTW: Mea Culba: You write very smart things on a regular basis despite jumping a language barrier.)

  • MAGIC AND GOD AND FRAMES –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic

    MAGIC AND GOD AND FRAMES

    –“I wonder what brought “magic” and “god” in one topic? People either measure through high context (not magic) low precision, or construe low context to look like high context so as to pretend the first (magic). Those who can ‘measure’ through low context, high precision can explain what they are doing, but the audience mostly can’t grok it… so they try use the audience’s language: high context, low precision.”— Mea Culba

    1 – You are correct, but the terminology is ‘high context low precision’ vs ‘high precision, low context’. (I’ve modified your prose to make use of those terms instead)

    2 – technically speaking there are very few grammars available to man. And the grammar of ‘magic’ is used to ascribe cause or intent to that which is not understood. So combining fiction and magic, we get religion. Adding law gets us monotheism.

    3 – people can be spoken to in the language of analogy, parable, and fiction, without engaging in lying (religion).

    We all defend our frames. The abrahamic lies have affected all but the far east. It took me a long time to understand the damage caused by abrahamism (lying). And it’s because people are so vulnerable to that form of lying, that it’s been so dangerous and destructive.

    Abrahamism combines lying and conflation into not only monotheism but a monopoly frame. This is terribly simple for the human mind. It is also, because it does NOT consist of competition, a PRISON for the human mind.

    (BTW: Mea Culba: You write very smart things on a regular basis despite jumping a language barrier.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:16:00 UTC

  • The Influence Of Operational Language

    Friend says –“I have to stop reading your posts because the vocabulary is framing my thoughts, and I prefer aesthetic framing.”– There is a great deal to learn from that statement. 1 – Frames (grammars) of constant relations affect your thinking. 2 – All of us are more or less sensitive to different inflationary grammars (analogical grammars), because of the divergence in our senses, experiences, and preferences, while our thoughts are made commensurable if not identical, via deflationary grammars – with operational being the highest context highest precision, dimensionally complete grammar. (This is profoundly important.) 3 – You can increase opportunities for low cost communication by inflating the frame by inflationary grammar and semantics. You can increase precision by deflating the frame with deflationary grammar and semantics.

  • THE INFLUENCE OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE Friend says –“I have to stop reading your

    THE INFLUENCE OF OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE

    Friend says –“I have to stop reading your posts because the vocabulary is framing my thoughts, and I prefer aesthetic framing.”–

    There is a great deal to learn from that statement.

    1 – Frames (grammars) of constant relations affect your thinking.

    2 – All of us are more or less sensitive to different inflationary grammars (analogical grammars), because of the divergence in our senses, experiences, and preferences, while our thoughts are made commensurable if not identical, via deflationary grammars – with operational being the highest context highest precision, dimensionally complete grammar. (This is profoundly important.)

    3 – You can increase opportunities for low cost communication by inflating the frame by inflationary grammar and semantics. You can increase precision by deflating the frame with deflationary grammar and semantics.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-22 08:03:00 UTC

  • The Influence Of Operational Language

    Friend says –“I have to stop reading your posts because the vocabulary is framing my thoughts, and I prefer aesthetic framing.”– There is a great deal to learn from that statement. 1 – Frames (grammars) of constant relations affect your thinking. 2 – All of us are more or less sensitive to different inflationary grammars (analogical grammars), because of the divergence in our senses, experiences, and preferences, while our thoughts are made commensurable if not identical, via deflationary grammars – with operational being the highest context highest precision, dimensionally complete grammar. (This is profoundly important.) 3 – You can increase opportunities for low cost communication by inflating the frame by inflationary grammar and semantics. You can increase precision by deflating the frame with deflationary grammar and semantics.

  • Operational Economics Is A Minimum Necessary Skill For Participation In Post-Medieval Discourse.

    If you don’t understand operational economics, meaning opportunities, incentives and the equilibration of those opportunities as we act on them, then you are no different in your deficiencies from a late medieval rationalist ignorant of empiricism. Economics is counter-intuitive, in large part because it exposes the fallacies of ethical, moral, and ‘good’ pretenses and creates a measurable means testing ethical and moral thoughts, words, and actions. We are, and we act, as extensions of the physical universe, and we do so by exactly the same laws, and language just is a polite means of negotiating with others. The advantage intelligence, of memory, of the ability to cooperate, and of the ability to live for three weeks without food, is that we can use fairly long periods to plan short medium and long term means of expending small amounts of energy as individuals, and together as groups, to capture calories necessary to support that fairly expensive neurological system. We are simply a better means of capturing, converting, and concentrating energy in a universe of perpetual entropy, because our memories allow us to predict the future, and act to seize the opportunity or alter it and create it or seize the risk and alter ir. At some point humans must stop seeking discounts (cunning in the short term ) and produce returns ( productivity through invention). And we seem to covet a steady state, yet never wish to pay for the long investments that make the great leaps in wealth possible. Because they are only possible when an elite minority possesses both technological advantage AND an internal demand to create markets that produce returns, rather than predations that prevent them in exchange for current and near term signal and consumption.

  • OPERATIONAL ECONOMICS IS A MINIMUM NECESSARY SKILL FOR PARTICIPATION IN POST-MED

    OPERATIONAL ECONOMICS IS A MINIMUM NECESSARY SKILL FOR PARTICIPATION IN POST-MEDIEVAL DISCOURSE.

    If you don’t understand operational economics, meaning opportunities, incentives and the equilibration of those opportunities as we act on them, then you are no different in your deficiencies from a late medieval rationalist ignorant of empiricism.

    Economics is counter-intuitive, in large part because it exposes the fallacies of ethical, moral, and ‘good’ pretenses and creates a measurable means testing ethical and moral thoughts, words, and actions.

    We are, and we act, as extensions of the physical universe, and we do so by exactly the same laws, and language just is a polite means of negotiating with others.

    The advantage intelligence, of memory, of the ability to cooperate, and of the ability to live for three weeks without food, is that we can use fairly long periods to plan short medium and long term means of expending small amounts of energy as individuals, and together as groups, to capture calories necessary to support that fairly expensive neurological system.

    We are simply a better means of capturing, converting, and concentrating energy in a universe of perpetual entropy, because our memories allow us to predict the future, and act to seize the opportunity or alter it and create it or seize the risk and alter ir.

    At some point humans must stop seeking discounts (cunning in the short term ) and produce returns ( productivity through invention).

    And we seem to covet a steady state, yet never wish to pay for the long investments that make the great leaps in wealth possible.

    Because they are only possible when an elite minority possesses both technological advantage AND an internal demand to create markets that produce returns, rather than predations that prevent them in exchange for current and near term signal and consumption.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-19 07:42:00 UTC

  • We Don’t All Have To Speak In Operational Language Any More Than We Need To Speak In Mathematics Or Legalese. But…. &#1

    Lets just say that there are inflationary grammars that assist in conveying meaning at lower cost, and deflationary grammars. And that the challenge is not so much in forcing everyone to use deflationary grammars, is it is, to sue devlationary grammars to eliminate ignorance, error, fraud and deceit from our inflationary grammars. I don’t expect very many people to write in or speak in testimonial, operational, propertarian language because it would be like asking everyone to talk in legalese. The problem is that without deflationary grammars (like math and the other logics, or operationalism and propertarianism) it is very difficult to sanitize inflationary languages that are low cost, of the frauds and deceits that impose high costs on others via overloading. There is no excuse for lies. even comforting lies, if the fictionalism that is a mater of allegorical convenience, produces externalities that are destructive.

  • We Don’t All Have To Speak In Operational Language Any More Than We Need To Speak In Mathematics Or Legalese. But…. &#1

    Lets just say that there are inflationary grammars that assist in conveying meaning at lower cost, and deflationary grammars. And that the challenge is not so much in forcing everyone to use deflationary grammars, is it is, to sue devlationary grammars to eliminate ignorance, error, fraud and deceit from our inflationary grammars. I don’t expect very many people to write in or speak in testimonial, operational, propertarian language because it would be like asking everyone to talk in legalese. The problem is that without deflationary grammars (like math and the other logics, or operationalism and propertarianism) it is very difficult to sanitize inflationary languages that are low cost, of the frauds and deceits that impose high costs on others via overloading. There is no excuse for lies. even comforting lies, if the fictionalism that is a mater of allegorical convenience, produces externalities that are destructive.

  • WE DON’T ALL HAVE TO SPEAK IN OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE ANY MORE THAN WE NEED TO SPEA

    WE DON’T ALL HAVE TO SPEAK IN OPERATIONAL LANGUAGE ANY MORE THAN WE NEED TO SPEAK IN MATHEMATICS OR LEGALESE. BUT….

    Lets just say that there are inflationary grammars that assist in conveying meaning at lower cost, and deflationary grammars. And that the challenge is not so much in forcing everyone to use deflationary grammars, is it is, to sue devlationary grammars to eliminate ignorance, error, fraud and deceit from our inflationary grammars.

    I don’t expect very many people to write in or speak in testimonial, operational, propertarian language because it would be like asking everyone to talk in legalese. The problem is that without deflationary grammars (like math and the other logics, or operationalism and propertarianism) it is very difficult to sanitize inflationary languages that are low cost, of the frauds and deceits that impose high costs on others via overloading.

    There is no excuse for lies. even comforting lies, if the fictionalism that is a mater of allegorical convenience, produces externalities that are destructive.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-01-17 14:03:00 UTC