DEFLATING “SCIENCE” (personal)(sketch) The Discipline of Science Consists of: 1) An aesthetic discipline – the search for status, power(influence), and profit through the acquisition of decidability (truth) and recipe (knowledge) and ‘stories’ (narratives), by observation, free association, and the elimination of ignorance thru deceit. 2) A technical discipline – the application and inventions of measures both physical, logical, and social(market) that reduce our possibility of engaging in ignorance thru deceit, leaving only truthful candidates for decidability, recipe and story. 3) A moral discipline – the means of describing and publishing our measurements, decidability, recipe, and stories by performing due diligence against: ignorance thru deceit, and publishing (speaking) the measurements, decidability, recipes, and ‘stories’ for testing by the market for measurements, decidability, recipes, and stories, consisting of others who share the aesthetic discipline of searching for status, power(influence) and profit through the acquisition of decidability(truth) reciepe(knowledge) and stories(narratives.) MAN IS THE MEASURE – THE UNIT OF COMMENSURABILITY ( … ) THE EPISTEMIC METHOD There exists only one epistemological method for the discovery of recipes and theories: – Observation->perception, – Free association-> wayfinding, – Hypothesis->construction, – Theory->survival from criticism, – Law->survival in the market for criticism, – Habituation -> survival, – Metaphysical inclusion -> replication. Within this method we find special cases of the epistemological method: non-contradiction, apriorisms, simplicity – in the same way we discover special cases of prime numbers – and for the same reason: coincidence of simplicities amidst the chaos of possibilities. But we eventually run low on simplicities at any given level of precision, and must develop new logical and physical and moral instrumentation in order to obtain sufficient information to discover more simplicities at greater precision. All the while defending against our tendencies to engage in error, bias,wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, pseudorationalism, pseudo-moralism, and deceit. THE DIMENSIONS OF TESTING To warranty our speech against the dark forces of error, bias, and deceit, we can test each existentially possible dimension – in which humans can act – against error, bias, and deceit. – Categorical Consistency – identity – Logical Consistency – internal correspondence – Empirical Consistency – external correspondence – Existential Consistency – operational correspondence – Moral Consistency – reciprocal correspondence – Scope Consistency – full accounting – dimensional correspondence. PARTIAL TESTING : THE SPECIAL CASE: APRIORISM 1) Apriorism is but a special case of Empiricism, just as Prime Numbers are a special case in mathematics, and just as is any set of operations that returns a natural number; and again, is a special case, just as contradiction is a special case in logic.The laws of triangles form a particularly useful set of special cases. 2) Few (possibly no non-tautological, or at least non-reductio) aprioristic statements survive scope consistency (I can find none in economics that are actionable). 3) We can establish free associations(hypotheses) empirically (top down) or constructively (bottom up). But the method of discovery places no truth constraint on the statement. All must survive the full test of dimensions. 4) This does NOT mean that we cannot use a ‘partial truth’ (an hypothesis that does not survive all six dimensions) to search for further associations (partial search criteria). It is this UTILITY IN SEARCHING that we have converted first into reason, second into rationalism, third into empiricism, fourth in to operationalism, and fifth into scope consistency, and sixth into ‘natural law’ or morality or ‘voluntary cooperation’ – volition which is necessary to ensure the information quality in small groups, just as norms and laws are necessary methods of establishing limits in larger groups, just as money is necessary for producing actionable information in very large groups. 5) there is but one epistemological method: accumulate information, identify pattern, search for hypothesis, criticize hypothesis to produce a theory, distribute the theory (speak), let others criticize the theory until it fails, or we create a conceptual norm of it (law), and finally until we habituate it entirely (metaphysical judgment). THE OUTPUTS OF THE DISCIPLINE OF SCIENCE 1) Stories (Theories): Theories describe an Opportunity Field. 2) Decidability (Instruments): Decidability describes objects, relations, values, and comparison operators. 3) Recipes (Operations or ‘transformations’): Recipes describe actionable knowledge that we can use to transform state. 4) Measurements (‘Facts’): Measurements describe (obviously) the operations and resulting measurements of objects, relations, and values. THIS COMPLETES THE SCIENTIFIC METHOD This process constitutes the completion of the scientific method for the warranty of due diligence of one’s testimony in every domain of human inquiry without exception. Now, lets look at its uses… THE MEASURE 1) Meaning (Awareness) ….True enough to imagine a conceptual relationship 2) Preference ….True enough for me to feel good about. 3) Actionability ….True enough for me to take actions that produce positive results. 4) Morality ….True enough for me to not cause others to react negatively to me. 5) Rationality ….True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values. 6) Decidability ….True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different values. 7) Truth ….True regardless of all opinions or perspectives. 8) Tautology ….Tautologically true: in that the two things are equal. THE MARKETS There is nothing special about physical science other than philosophy was free of COST constraints but held by moral constraints, and science was free of MORAL constraints as well as cost constraints, and judicial law was bound by both. Personal Associative Cooperative Reproductive Productive Commons Polities DISCIPLINES: 0 – Sentience (cognitive science – limits of cognition) 1 – Philosophy (science of truthful speech) 2 – Law (social/cooperative science) 3 – Economics (organizational science) 4 – Mathematics ( science of measurement ) 5 – Physical Science (physical sciences of the universe) 6 – Technology (physical sciences in materials) 7 – Engineering, (physical sciences in construction) 8 – Commerce, THE VALUE OF OUTPUTS OF THE DISCIPLINE OF SCIENCE Stories (Opportunities [search]) : Decidabilty (Choice / Persuade / Decide:) Recipies (Transformations): Measurements (facts): THE DEFLATION OF “THEORY/THEORIES” The Story of a theory can fail. The Decidability can fail. The Recipe can fail The Measurements can fail. Newton’s Story failed, but his Decidability, and Recipe, and Measurements survive. So while hypotheses fail, it is not necessarily true that theories fail, so much as we continuously improve the precision of those narratives, decidability, recipe and measurements. Why? Because the question itself frames the theory. In other words, if we are asking about gravity, newtons question, his decidability, his recipes, all survive and constitute the majority of calculations we perform to this day. Measurement provides a means of warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, and deceit. And in fact, we can state that all logical methods constitute some means of measurement. Anything that is testable constitutes a measure. The question is only what dimensions of relations that we wish to measure, and the constancy of those relations.
Theme: Science
-
Yes. I use via negativa, criticism, science, to see what survives… Even in gender studies.
—“Anne Tripp He’s using his negativia approach in gender stereotyping. He does it for males too. I agree with you that “if you want the horse to drink, lead it to water, don’t beat it.” But positivity is like positive affirmations … You have to have space or vacuum in the psyche for the information, otherwise it’s useless fluff.”—
-
Yes. I use via negativa, criticism, science, to see what survives… Even in gender studies.
—“Anne Tripp He’s using his negativia approach in gender stereotyping. He does it for males too. I agree with you that “if you want the horse to drink, lead it to water, don’t beat it.” But positivity is like positive affirmations … You have to have space or vacuum in the psyche for the information, otherwise it’s useless fluff.”—
-
The Feminine. Via Negativa Doesn’t Fit The Justificationist Discourse, So You Have to Know My Goals
—“Curt How about working on the positive aspects of female psychology and behaviour and how to develop them, rather than merely the ‘Women are weak, bad and a dangerous influence if they aren’t controlled’?”—Claire Rae Randall GREAT QUESTION. Well, if you go into my past work you see an awful lot of INTERPERSONAL adulation of women. And my history with (a variety) of women sort of speaks for itself. But that is different from the problem of the current era, and the way that we enfranchised women. And that I merely suggest that we give women a separate house so that men and women must agree, since we see such specialized views of the world.
As far as I know all my arguments run back to the same basic idea: that we evolved a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy, and the the major and minor races, civilizations, classes, and genders have chosen specific strategies for doing so, and that the only way to know what is ‘good’ is that which is achievable through trade between people regardless of civilization, clan, class and gender, But at present the ant-aristocratic, anti white, anti west, anti-male dogma of the marxists, socialists, feminists, and postmodernists, is the dominant ‘status quo’ and I find it necessary to provide an arsenal of arguments to defeat that status quo leaving nothing but VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE that makes use of the information (wants) of all parts of the sense-perceptoin spectrum So my via-negativa in this subject is just like my via-negativa in every other subject – including my via-negativa against the white supremacists. I don’t think men have any other opinion than that women are DESIRABLE and that some women are TERRIBLY DESIRABLE and worthy dying for. I think that given the lack of agency, and the high degree of mental illness in women, (just as the high degree of impulsivity and violence in men) that failing to account for these outliers and failing to suppress them in political expression, through demand for demonstrated performance, is the problem. Yet, exclusion from the group because of ability is not frightening for men – but comforting. But for women, it’s terrifying to be eliminated from the debate. So while it has been possible to limit male participation in the debate over the commons it would be very difficult for women to accept meritocracy as do men. We have spent 50k years politically domesticating man, and we have spent less than a century politically domesticating women, and it shows. Ergo, the answer I propose is to produce a market for agency through demonstrated ability in the possession of agency. And to make use of the information and wants of women of agency and men of agency, and to incrementally suppress and eventually reduce, those people who lack agency. Thanks. Adore you. Curt Doolittle -
The Feminine. Via Negativa Doesn’t Fit The Justificationist Discourse, So You Have to Know My Goals
—“Curt How about working on the positive aspects of female psychology and behaviour and how to develop them, rather than merely the ‘Women are weak, bad and a dangerous influence if they aren’t controlled’?”—Claire Rae Randall GREAT QUESTION. Well, if you go into my past work you see an awful lot of INTERPERSONAL adulation of women. And my history with (a variety) of women sort of speaks for itself. But that is different from the problem of the current era, and the way that we enfranchised women. And that I merely suggest that we give women a separate house so that men and women must agree, since we see such specialized views of the world.
As far as I know all my arguments run back to the same basic idea: that we evolved a division of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, and advocacy, and the the major and minor races, civilizations, classes, and genders have chosen specific strategies for doing so, and that the only way to know what is ‘good’ is that which is achievable through trade between people regardless of civilization, clan, class and gender, But at present the ant-aristocratic, anti white, anti west, anti-male dogma of the marxists, socialists, feminists, and postmodernists, is the dominant ‘status quo’ and I find it necessary to provide an arsenal of arguments to defeat that status quo leaving nothing but VOLUNTARY EXCHANGE that makes use of the information (wants) of all parts of the sense-perceptoin spectrum So my via-negativa in this subject is just like my via-negativa in every other subject – including my via-negativa against the white supremacists. I don’t think men have any other opinion than that women are DESIRABLE and that some women are TERRIBLY DESIRABLE and worthy dying for. I think that given the lack of agency, and the high degree of mental illness in women, (just as the high degree of impulsivity and violence in men) that failing to account for these outliers and failing to suppress them in political expression, through demand for demonstrated performance, is the problem. Yet, exclusion from the group because of ability is not frightening for men – but comforting. But for women, it’s terrifying to be eliminated from the debate. So while it has been possible to limit male participation in the debate over the commons it would be very difficult for women to accept meritocracy as do men. We have spent 50k years politically domesticating man, and we have spent less than a century politically domesticating women, and it shows. Ergo, the answer I propose is to produce a market for agency through demonstrated ability in the possession of agency. And to make use of the information and wants of women of agency and men of agency, and to incrementally suppress and eventually reduce, those people who lack agency. Thanks. Adore you. Curt Doolittle -
“Claims of “Settled science” are principal reason why science advances funeral b
—“Claims of “Settled science” are principal reason why science advances funeral by funeral.”—James Santagata
Source date (UTC): 2017-05-01 09:59:00 UTC
-
OLD: Theological > Metaphysical > Positive or 20thC. Supernatural(Anthropocentri
OLD: Theological > Metaphysical > Positive
or
20thC. Supernatural(Anthropocentric) > Rational(ideal) > Scientific (Descriptive).
or
21stC: Fictionalism, Rationalism, Empiricism, Operationalism.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-30 13:40:00 UTC
-
“Life foolishly imitates art once again. The Seattle March for Science was a par
—“Life foolishly imitates art once again. The Seattle March for Science was a parade for the pseudo-intellectual Emperors to show off their new clothes. They’ve been working on these costumes for some time.”—Luke Weinhagen
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 20:06:00 UTC
-
“The “march for science” in seattle, was really just scientism mixed with left w
—“The “march for science” in seattle, was really just scientism mixed with left wing virtue signaling. So, people will find gods. And if they’re not smart, or productive gods, they will be dumb, or parasitic gods.”—- Ely Harman
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 18:35:00 UTC
-
Scientifically speaking, the only ‘good’ is actually ‘zero tolerance’
Scientifically speaking, the only ‘good’ is actually ‘zero tolerance’.
Source date (UTC): 2017-04-28 13:13:00 UTC