RT @curtdoolittle: Mankind faces the end of mystery limiting us to the merely unknown. And with that end of mystery comes the necessity of…
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 19:21:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638621928893063200
SIX REMAINING GREAT FLAWS IN HUMAN THOUGHT
1. The search for justification(proof) rather than falsification(survival).
2. The search for inconsistent utilities (paradigms) rather than a hierarchy of consistent first principles (universal paradigm).
3. The search for the ideal person, behavior, wants, means, and ends, rather than means of cooperation between male and female opposites.
4. The search for positive law of thou shall, limiting possibilities, vs negative laws of though shall-not, leaving open infinite possibilities.
5. The search for the good instead of the true, from which we choose possible goods.
6. The search for political uniformity as a static optimum rather than competing diversities as an evolutionary optimum – the search for predictable certainty rather than evolutionary and adaptive uncertainty.
Every one of these falsehoods is hostile to the first principle of the universe: evolutionary computation, and our condition in the capture and transformation of energy per person, yielding us the greatest prosperity with which to make the greatest range of choices that will as a consequence, repeat the cycle, of evolutionary computation, and the improvement of our condition by increasing the capture and transformation of energy.
“NO MORE ERRORS, FALSEHOODS, AND LIES”
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 18:02:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638602036215160840
SIX REMAINING GREAT FLAWS IN HUMAN THOUGHT
1. The search for justification(proof) rather than falsification(survival).
2. The search for inconsistent utilities (paradigms) rather than a hierarchy of consistent first principles (universal paradigm).
3. The search for the ideal person, behavior, wants, means, and ends, rather than means of cooperation between male and female opposites.
4. The search for positive law of thou shall, limiting possibilities, vs negative laws of though shall-not, leaving open infinite possibilities.
5. The search for the good instead of the true, from which we choose possible goods.
6. The search for political uniformity as a static optimum rather than competing diversities as an evolutionary optimum – the search for predictable certainty rather than evolutionary and adaptive uncertainty.
Every one of these falsehoods is hostile to the first principle of the universe: evolutionary computation, and our condition in the capture and transformation of energy per person, yielding us the greatest prosperity with which to make the greatest range of choices that will as a consequence, repeat the cycle, of evolutionary computation, and the improvement of our condition by increasing the capture and transformation of energy.
“NO MORE ERRORS, FALSEHOODS, AND LIES”
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 18:02:23 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638602036370456576
RT @ThruTheHayes: @REllerman @curtdoolittle In the name of human kind.
In the name of God.
In the name of the Law.
In the name of science.…
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 17:44:43 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638597589661630465
Why do you feel knowledgeable enough to make those statements? When I can, without any effort at all, call in the other people who are as equally or more knowledgeable than I am, who work with the data itself, and will disagree with you. Genetics are the most deterministic property of all human behavior. Some of the correlations are minor variations, but some are not. In particular we can measure the differences between sexes, classes, ethnicities, and races. And in large part the differences in ethnicities. and races is due to variation in neotenic development, sexual dimorphism, and class size. And then class traits and class size cause demand for normative, traditional, and institutional differences. And these are then moderated by state of development, competitors, resources, climate, and geography. But of these differences, even minor variations in the distribution and amplitude of Neoteny, IQ and Personality are disproportionately influential.
Reply addressees: @enigma3078
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 16:43:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638582184788336666
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638580086239555585
Why do you feel knowledgeable enough to make those statements? When I can, without any effort at all, call in the other people who are as equally or more knowledgeable than I am, who work with the data itself, and will disagree with you. Genetics are the most deterministic property of all human behavior. Some of the correlations are minor variations, but some are not. In particular we can measure the differences between sexes, classes, ethnicities, and races. And in large part the differences in ethnicities. and races is due to variation in neotenic development, sexual dimorphism, and class size. And then class traits and class size cause demand for normative, traditional, and institutional differences. And these are then moderated by state of development, competitors, resources, climate, and geography. But of these differences, even minor variations in the distribution and amplitude of Neoteny, IQ and Personality are disproportionately influential.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-22 16:43:30 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638582184922476544
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638580086239555585
RT @ContraFabianist: @curtdoolittle Where the utility of religion and philosophy exceeds that of science, is in the production of predictiv…
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-21 17:59:11 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638238842753806355
Someone asked me to look into your argument because a block of conservatives are aware I will tell them the truth regarding scientific claims. I have looked into your argument and posting history. Yes you have a hypothesis. It is only a hypothesis. This hypothesis requires the presumption that penetrating the lung wall is necessary to reach the infectable cells and interfere with viral insertion and replication. As far as I know that’s not true, but I can’t testify to it. Other than that I don’t see any falsification of the various vaccines. And I’m still surprised at the claims we don’t grasp viruses or their mechanisms of infection and replication. If you can add additional research that might be helpful. But at present I’m concerned about side effects and the fact that the state mandated a therapy (not a vaccine) that hadn’t sufficient testing to warranty againt side effects, when the threat of the virus was simply not that severe unless you were in a vulnerable demographic.
Reply addressees: @leelasik @AmerLibertyTree
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-21 03:47:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638024491245682688
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638018805388701696
Someone asked me to look into your argument because a block of conservatives are aware I will tell them the truth regarding scientific claims. I have looked into your argument and posting history. Yes you have a hypothesis. It is only a hypothesis. This hypothesis requires the presumption that penetrating the lung wall is necessary to reach the infectable cells and interfere with viral insertion and replication. As far as I know that’s not true, but I can’t testify to it. Other than that I don’t see any falsification of the various vaccines. And I’m still surprised at the claims we don’t grasp viruses or their mechanisms of infection and replication. If you can add additional research that might be helpful. But at present I’m concerned about side effects and the fact that the state mandated a therapy (not a vaccine) that hadn’t sufficient testing to warranty againt side effects, when the threat of the virus was simply not that severe unless you were in a vulnerable demographic.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-21 03:47:26 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638024491417714688
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1638018805388701696
CURT: “WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY THE EVOLUTION OF WEIGHTS AND MEASURES? MAN AS THE MEASURE OF ALL THINGS TO MAN? OR VITRUVIANISM?”
I’m trying to draw attention to the rather obvious progress of our minds and words as measurements that begin with what’s available to us at birth, and what we evolved over the millennia to COMPENSATE for the lack of precision in the measurements of our birth. 😉
EVOLUTION:
Existential Reality
Nervous System (sensing vibrations – change)
Embodiment (human subjectively testable weights and measures)
Anthropomorphism (applied human weights and measures)
Mythology (Lessons by suggestion)
Religion (Standards of weights and measures)
Dialectic (agreement (not truth))
Laws (Standards of Weights and Measures)
Testimony (Truth (not agreement))
Reason (Adversarialism, Sets)
Philosophy (Plato, Idealism, Analogies, Abstractions)
Natural Philosophy (Observations)
History (Evidence)
Empiricism (measurements)
Science (mathematics)
Evolutionary Computation (computation)
Simulation (Simulation by evolutionary competition)
Existential Reality (identity)
And… We’re done.
Source date (UTC): 2023-03-20 20:12:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1637910086671581187