October 17th, 2018 5:30 PM ECONOMIC PSEUDOSCIENCE = CHERRY PICKING [W]hat separates economic science from economic pseudoscience, is selective measurement of changes in capital. Labor mobility turns out to be one of the WORST POSSIBLE means of altering poverty. Bring capital and rule of law to people, not people to capital and rule of law: One either brings rule of law and capital to people (colonialism) or one brings people to rule of law and capital (reverse-colonialism). The only choice is whether you colonize and INCREASE world institutional capital, or are colonized and CONSUME world institutional capital – while claiming you’ve made an increase in productivity rather than consumption.
Theme: Science
-
Economic Pseudoscience = Cherry Picking
October 17th, 2018 5:30 PM ECONOMIC PSEUDOSCIENCE = CHERRY PICKING [W]hat separates economic science from economic pseudoscience, is selective measurement of changes in capital. Labor mobility turns out to be one of the WORST POSSIBLE means of altering poverty. Bring capital and rule of law to people, not people to capital and rule of law: One either brings rule of law and capital to people (colonialism) or one brings people to rule of law and capital (reverse-colonialism). The only choice is whether you colonize and INCREASE world institutional capital, or are colonized and CONSUME world institutional capital – while claiming you’ve made an increase in productivity rather than consumption.
-
Untitled
https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/10/jean-piaget-the-superior-psychogenetic-cognition-of-europeans/https://www.counter-currents.com/2018/10/jean-piaget-the-superior-psychogenetic-cognition-of-europeans/
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 18:14:00 UTC
-
ECONOMIC PSEUDOSCIENCE = CHERRY PICKING What separates economic science from eco
ECONOMIC PSEUDOSCIENCE = CHERRY PICKING
What separates economic science from economic pseudoscience, is selective measurement of changes in capital.
Labor mobility turns out to be one of the WORST POSSIBLE means of altering poverty.
Bring capital and rule of law to people, not people to capital and rule of law: One either brings rule of law and capital to people (colonialism) or one brings people to rule of law and capital (reverse-colonialism).
The only choice is whether you colonize and INCREASE world institutional capital, or are colonized and CONSUME world institutional capital – while claiming you’ve made an increase in productivity rather than consumption.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 17:30:00 UTC
-
LAW IS JUST MORE PRECISE THAN RELIGION IN THE SAME WAY THAT SCIENCE IS MORE PREC
LAW IS JUST MORE PRECISE THAN RELIGION IN THE SAME WAY THAT SCIENCE IS MORE PRECISE THAN REASON – AND THEREFORE LESS OPEN TO DECEIT AND CORRUPTOIN.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 16:41:29 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1052600496823959553
-
LAW IS JUST MORE PRECISE THAN RELIGION IN THE SAME WAY THAT SCIENCE IS MORE PREC
LAW IS JUST MORE PRECISE THAN RELIGION IN THE SAME WAY THAT SCIENCE IS MORE PRECISE THAN REASON – AND THEREFORE LESS OPEN TO DECEIT AND CORRUPTOIN.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 12:41:00 UTC
-
RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION (EXCUSE) VS SCIENTIFIC FALSIFICATION (SURVIVAL) —“Acce
RELIGIOUS JUSTIFICATION (EXCUSE) VS SCIENTIFIC FALSIFICATION (SURVIVAL)
—“Accepting scientific authority without conducting the experiments and doing the research yourself is an expression of faith.”— Clay Caldwell
Likewise, accepting supernatural authority without direct, testifiable, experience of the people and events, and miracles(magic) is an act of faith.
Wherease due diligence in science is an effort to disprove a theory, not prove one. we cannot prove science. We can only find possibilities and seek to falsify them until we can’t. When we can’t falsify them (because of coherence, consistency, and correspondence, and explanatory power, and parsimony) then we have to admit to ourselves that it’s likely true.
So its not true that one has ‘faith in science’ but one simply does the hard work of falsifying our fantasies such that only that which we cannot make false remains – that’s the entire point of scientific research: to perform due diligence against your imagination, by producing measurements that eliminate the possibility of your imaginings.
The problem is that one can read either the research or other’s fictionalism or sensationalism of that research. And it takes great knowledge to understand such research, while only takes the mind of a child to understand mythology by intuition and imitation. So knowledge < wisdom < parable describe a means of graceful failure from those who possess knowledge and ability to those that possess neither.
We can train people’s intuition many ways, and it turns out that abrahamic religion, like marxism, postmodernism, and feminism, is just the worst way possible.
Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 11:01:00 UTC
-
Atheism Isn’t a Religion. at Best It’s an Ideology
October 16th, 2018 4:38 PM ATHEISM ISN’T A RELIGION. AT BEST IT’S AN IDEOLOGY [A]theism isn’t a religion (and casting it as such is a fraud), it’s a statement of Science (measurement) and used as an Ideology (political change), and arguably a Prosecution (law against fraud and harm). The only reason atheism is ridiculous is because we haven’t restored the oath, stoicism (mindfulness), ancestor, and nature worship (celebration). (native western religion) As such Criticism without Replacement is rather IDEOLOGICAL, for the simple reason that intuition(emotions) DO REQUIRE training, just as do our bodies, reason (reason, calculation, computation), and memories (knowledge, skills). Religion is just one of the layers of education. We can perform that education by various means. The whole ‘lies’ nonsense isn’t a necessary means. There is no evidence of it.
-
Atheism Isn’t a Religion. at Best It’s an Ideology
October 16th, 2018 4:38 PM ATHEISM ISN’T A RELIGION. AT BEST IT’S AN IDEOLOGY [A]theism isn’t a religion (and casting it as such is a fraud), it’s a statement of Science (measurement) and used as an Ideology (political change), and arguably a Prosecution (law against fraud and harm). The only reason atheism is ridiculous is because we haven’t restored the oath, stoicism (mindfulness), ancestor, and nature worship (celebration). (native western religion) As such Criticism without Replacement is rather IDEOLOGICAL, for the simple reason that intuition(emotions) DO REQUIRE training, just as do our bodies, reason (reason, calculation, computation), and memories (knowledge, skills). Religion is just one of the layers of education. We can perform that education by various means. The whole ‘lies’ nonsense isn’t a necessary means. There is no evidence of it.
-
Propertarianism Isn’t an Ideology.
October 16th, 2018 4:22 PM PROPERTARIANISM ISN’T AN IDEOLOGY. IT’S THE LOGIC OF RECIPROCITY (Propertarianism) AND THE SCIENCE OF TESTIMONY, COMBINED INTO A FORMAL RATIO-EMPIRICAL SYSTEM OF LAW (Decidability) FOR ETHICS, AND POLITICS. In other words, it’s the solution to social science.
—“This is crucial for people that want to claim they don’t adhere to the propertarian ideology. It is not an ideology. It is a methodology and much like science it focuses on empirical evidence and the falsification of proposed truth claims. Most people that say they don’t agree with propertarian ideology have an ideology of their own that has been found to be based on lies via propertarian methods – and that’s the real objection.”– Curtus Maximus (A Sock/Alias of Someone Else)
[Y]ou cannot defeat it. Sorry. You can however, state that despite your ideology being parasitic, predatory(immoral) and dishonest (fraudulent) that you cannot compete by meritocratic (market, evolutionary, eugenic) means, (meaning you’re inferior) and therefore must resort to parasitism, predation, and deceit (fraud), to survive by parasitism, predation, and fraud. It’s ok to do that. It’s just the truth. But you can’t make any kind of moral argument to support it.