Curt Doolittle

Theme: Science

  • anti pseudoscience

    http://www.rooshv.com/the-theory-of-evolution-does-not-apply-to-modern-human-beingsMore anti pseudoscience

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-03 11:23:00 UTC

  • The Movement Against Pseudoscience Continues

    [T]heories of perception not fact.

    —“We suggest that most theories about political effects of inequality need to be either abandoned or reframed as theories about the effects of perceived inequality”—

    h/t bryan caplan http://www.nber.org/papers/w21174.pdf Source: (1) Curt Doolittle

  • The Movement Against Pseudoscience Continues

    [T]heories of perception not fact.

    —“We suggest that most theories about political effects of inequality need to be either abandoned or reframed as theories about the effects of perceived inequality”—

    h/t bryan caplan http://www.nber.org/papers/w21174.pdf Source: (1) Curt Doolittle

  • vs Pinker. Taleb is right. I am even more right. 😉 That’s because violence is a

    http://blog.jim.com/culture/taleb-refutes-pinker-on-war/Taleb vs Pinker.

    Taleb is right.

    I am even more right. 😉

    That’s because violence is a nonsense measure. A self justifying selection bias.

    Theft and parasitism are the full measure of predation.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-28 10:50:00 UTC

  • MOVEMENT AGAINST PSEUDOSCIENCE CONTINUES —“We suggest that most theories about

    http://www.nber.org/papers/w21174.pdfTHE MOVEMENT AGAINST PSEUDOSCIENCE CONTINUES

    —“We suggest that most theories about political

    effects of inequality need to be either abandoned or reframed as theories about the effects of perceived

    inequality”—

    h/t bryan caplan

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-28 02:37:00 UTC

  • myth of the immobile European slowly evaporates under the heat if science. Our b

    http://eurogenes.blogspot.com/2015/05/high-female-mobility-in-bronze-age.htmlThe myth of the immobile European slowly evaporates under the heat if science.

    Our better classes outbred like hell.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 05:25:00 UTC

  • IS A THEORY GOOD BECAUSE IT IS USEFUL, OR BECAUSE WE FEEL IT IS TRUE? And is it

    IS A THEORY GOOD BECAUSE IT IS USEFUL, OR BECAUSE WE FEEL IT IS TRUE? And is it truthful because we can defend it, or because we cannot falsify it?

    (slightly tricky question)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 03:59:00 UTC

  • YES, MY POINT OF VIEW (MY VALUES) ARE WESTERN: SCIENTIFIC. BUT THAT IMPLIES BIAS

    YES, MY POINT OF VIEW (MY VALUES) ARE WESTERN: SCIENTIFIC. BUT THAT IMPLIES BIAS AND RELATIVITY NOT TRUTH. SO WHY AM I SO INTERESTED IN TRUTH?

    (h/t Karl )

    My point of view *IS* western; meaning: scientific. That is correct.

    Operations named can indeed be used as narrative for meaning. That is correct. Although that says nothing about the truth of the meaning inferred from the operations..

    Other cultures do not use rule of law, as such do not require logic in decision making. Yet liberty is only logically possible under rule of law. Other cultures don’t desire liberty. They desire consumption (as do most people in our culture as well). At present, liberty is a cultural preference of aristocratic civilization. But that just means that aristocratic civilization is scientific in function.

    I don’t generally make moral arguments except for ‘fun’ – I make AMORAL arguments. That’s the beauty of this logic: it’s not loaded. So, if one seeks to use this logic to create any possible political order, one can do so. But one need not (and cannot) resort to deception to do it.

    What isn’t obvious is that if you use this logic you can create non-monopoly social orders in a heterogeneous polity assuming that the rulers (monarchy) persists in maintaining rule of law, common organic law, property en toto, decide-able by the requirement for fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary exchange.

    Unlike unlimited free-associationists (advocates of the heroism of science) I am not interested in furthering free association – I don’t think it can be furthered. I’m only interested in preventing bias, propaganda and deceit. I am not even that concerned with error.

    Just as christianity was used to destroy western religion and thought, pseudoscience as used to destroy western law and thought.

    Rule of law is our religion. Virtue is our religion. Nature is our religion. Commons are the produce of our religion. And truth is our most precious commons.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-26 03:54:00 UTC

  • OMFG. Of all the things I have done, I am most proud of the combination of testi

    OMFG. Of all the things I have done, I am most proud of the combination of testimonial truth and operational criticism that complete the suite of criticisms that we call ‘science’.

    Just riding high today. Sigh.

    I wish I could talk to Popper. He would have understood. Hayek probably not, but Popper for certain.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-25 12:00:00 UTC

  • ERROR IN UNDERSTANDING: OPERATIONALISM IS CRITICISM, NOT JUSTIFICATION —“Opera

    http://www.lehigh.edu/~mhb0/Operationalism.pdfTHE ERROR IN UNDERSTANDING: OPERATIONALISM IS CRITICISM, NOT JUSTIFICATION

    —“Operational definitions were a neo-Machean development that connected with the positivism of Logical Positivism. Logical Positivism failed, with the failure of operational definitions being just one of multiple and multifarious failures of Logical Positivism more broadly.”—

    The tragedy is that operationalism failed.

    The depth of this tragedy is one of the great intellectual failures of human History.

    Operational definitions test the existential possibility of our premises.

    All those great minds failed.

    And the twentieth century was an age of pseudoscience because of it.

    What could we have done without a century of marxism, socialism, postmodernism, freudian psychology, Boazian anthropology, Keynesian justification of theft, Rawlsian deception, Cantorian sets, and the pseudoscientific attacks on physics? Would philosophy have been lost had we saved it with operations? I think so.

    ANOTHER EXAMPLE OF FAILURE

    Source date (UTC): 2015-05-25 11:50:00 UTC