Theme: Science

  • all social science appears to be pseudoscience. almost all psychology. much envi

    all social science appears to be pseudoscience. almost all psychology. much environmental. Physics, Chemistry, Biology, ok.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-12 07:55:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797346975368773632

    Reply addressees: @CatoInstitute

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797346453672828928


    IN REPLY TO:

    @CatoInstitute

    When (if ever) should government fund science? https://t.co/4b8WTkSiah https://t.co/qCYzsJhsOy

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797346453672828928

  • It’s not that economics isn’t empirical.It’s that its largely immoral.But scienc

    It’s not that economics isn’t empirical.It’s that its largely immoral.But science is a moral discipline.So if it’s immoral is it scientific?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-12 02:59:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797272551756103680

  • “So, the invention of the concept of empirical truth gives our culture a faster

    —“So, the invention of the concept of empirical truth gives our culture a faster OODA loop?”— J.H. (An interesting analogy, but yes.)


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 22:41:00 UTC

  • It’s not that economics isn’t empirical.It’s that its largely immoral.But scienc

    It’s not that economics isn’t empirical.It’s that its largely immoral.But science is a moral discipline.So if it’s immoral is it scientific?


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 21:59:00 UTC

  • NO. SCIENCE IS A MORAL DISCIPLINE WITHIN NATURAL LAW: THE MEANS BY WHICH WE WARR

    NO. SCIENCE IS A MORAL DISCIPLINE WITHIN NATURAL LAW: THE MEANS BY WHICH WE WARRANT THE TRUTHFULNESS OF OUR STATEMENTS.

    The languges of science(testimony), physical science, propertarianism (social science), natural law (science of dispute resolution), accounting, finance, and economics, (measurement of production), function as the universal language of truth-telling.

    The discipline of science asks us to warranty that we have performed due diligence on our statements. We warranty that we have eliminated error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, pseudoscience, and deceit from our utterances.

    That’s what science is:

    A NATURAL LAW: a warranty of our information, just like the warranty of our services, just as the warranty of our products, just as the warranty of our speech.

    Period. End of story.

    I know. You thought you were smart. You were so proud that you had transcended superstition. But it never occurred to you that you were just as ridiculous in the present generation due to the pseudosciences of Marx, Freud, Boaz, Adorno than your superstitious ancestors were in the pseudoscience of theology.

    Ok. Have we got that straight? Look in the mirror. Repeat after me: “I was suckered by pseudoscience, just like my ancestors were suckered by superstition. I am a sucker. I pledge not to be a sucker any longer. There is only one moral rule in both silver(negative) and gold (positive) forms: Impose not cost upon the cost born by others, by limiting yourself to actions and words, consisting only of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, limited to productive externalities.

    Ethelebert (Anglo-Saxon Silver Rule), Jesus (Golden-Rule), and Kant (bi-metal rule), all said the same thing. Everything else is lies to justify theft and to circumvent voluntary transfers between individuals classes and groups.

    Ok. We’re done here.

    “Please stop torturing me with your postmodern superstitions, ok?. Thanks, -The Management.”

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:39:00 UTC

  • I have tried to end the restoration of platonism to mathematics. And my opinion

    I have tried to end the restoration of platonism to mathematics. And my opinion is that it’s not Godel but Turing that matters


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:12:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124856424841224

    Reply addressees: @carson_gross

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124514333110272


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124514333110272

  • We have to be careful with Godel, since most application of his (very specific w

    We have to be careful with Godel, since most application of his (very specific work) is erroneous and pseudoscientific.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:11:49 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124687096676352

    Reply addressees: @carson_gross

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124514333110272


    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124514333110272

  • Can we shut down economics departments? No. We can however forbid the publicatio

    Can we shut down economics departments? No. We can however forbid the publication of pseudoscience: involuntary transfers.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:10:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797124324708810753

  • NO. MORALITY IS AS OBJECTIVE AS THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES (propertarian basics) No,

    NO. MORALITY IS AS OBJECTIVE AS THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES

    (propertarian basics)

    No, moral decidability is perfectly objective. Pseudo-moral norms may or man not be in fact moral. Subjective moral bias, may or may not be in fact moral. But moral rules are not subjective. It’s that your moral intuitions consist of possible truths combined with, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, and outright deceit.

    Morality is a purely scientific discipline. The purpose of the scientific method is to eliminate the various falsehoods from our imaginations and our speech.

    We don’t like that morality is scientific, any more than we liked that science disproved our religious beliefs. But our moral intuitions and our moral beliefs are just as false as our assumptions about the religious statements and pre-scientific era assumptions.

    If you think morality is subjective you are just as ridiculous as flat-earthers, and theological fundamentalists. There isn’t any difference except the excuses that you use. You just use different excuses.

    So deal with it. There is very little difference between your presumption of moral subjectivity and moral dictate. Instead, morality is objectively scientific and we just lie a lot to get away with lots of falsehoods in this era like we did the past eras.

    There is only one silver and one golden rule: Do nothing to impose a cost upon that which others have imposed a cost to create or accumulate. And therefore limit your actions to those that consist entirely of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers, limited to productive externalities. The evolutionary function of morality is to aggressively prohibit the free riding in its various forms so that we preserve the incentive to cooperate, because with the expense of the human life form, it is only through cooperation in the production of calories in all their forms, that we defeat the dark forces of entropy, time, and ignorance.

    That’s it. Morality is as scientific as are the physical sciences with the only difference being that because we possess memories, we are able to borrow and lend cooperative efforts across time. We have the ability to ‘calculate’ using memory by means that the universe cannot.

    But otherwise we are not different from any other form of organized matter in the universe: we are bound by the physical rules of it. And those that disobey those rules are extinct, or out gunned, germ-ed, steel-ed, norm-ed, and institution-ed, cultured, and genetic-ed, by those what obey them more closely.

    Period. End of argument. Social Science is SOLVED.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:10:00 UTC

  • Secret: There is no value in economics in social policy – at all. The only reaso

    Secret: There is no value in economics in social policy – at all. The only reason we use economics is because we failed to solve social sci.


    Source date (UTC): 2016-11-11 17:04:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/797122852524851200