Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • TRUTH AGAINST THE WORLD by Gabriel Schmeiske Laport Europe’s achievement was des

    TRUTH AGAINST THE WORLD

    by Gabriel Schmeiske Laport

    Europe’s achievement was despite Christianity, not as a result of it.

    Christianity hasn’t preserved, its has subverted, annexed, appropriated in the real sense European culture, into the failing amalgam we see in the Catholicism.

    That’s a fact, and that’s slowly and steadily emerging. From far earlier times, prior to current narratives, as far back as the church scholars themselves such as the Culdeans, but notably since the epoch of L. A. Waddell and co.

    To attempt to imply this is a narrative, rooted in a desire to rewrite history in a manner which portraits Pre-Abrahamic Europe favorably for the purpose of ideological propaganda is laughable.

    Furthermore it’s blatant projection. The historical orthodoxy, which cherry picks from accounts, engages in nepotism, and restricts access, has launched numerous outrageous campaigns of slander, censorship and vandalism to paint a certain historians and their findings as a malicious and subversive. It’s ended numerous careers and even lives. It’s used every fallacious device to sustain itself to this day – from every ivory tower (((Uni)))versity – as a hegemon of History.

    That’s the problem here, that’s why it’s become unpopular and that’s why ultimately, truth is being outed, but I digress.

    Truth against the world.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-15 15:43:00 UTC

  • Truth Against The World

    by Gabriel Schmeiske Laport Europe’s achievement was despite Christianity, not as a result of it. Christianity hasn’t preserved, its has subverted, annexed, appropriated in the real sense European culture, into the failing amalgam we see in the Catholicism. That’s a fact, and that’s slowly and steadily emerging. From far earlier times, prior to current narratives, as far back as the church scholars themselves such as the Culdeans, but notably since the epoch of L. A. Waddell and co. To attempt to imply this is a narrative, rooted in a desire to rewrite history in a manner which portraits Pre-Abrahamic Europe favorably for the purpose of ideological propaganda is laughable. Furthermore it’s blatant projection. The historical orthodoxy, which cherry picks from accounts, engages in nepotism, and restricts access, has launched numerous outrageous campaigns of slander, censorship and vandalism to paint a certain historians and their findings as a malicious and subversive. It’s ended numerous careers and even lives. It’s used every fallacious device to sustain itself to this day – from every ivory tower (((Uni)))versity – as a hegemon of History. That’s the problem here, that’s why it’s become unpopular and that’s why ultimately, truth is being outed, but I digress. Truth against the world.

  • Truth Against The World

    by Gabriel Schmeiske Laport Europe’s achievement was despite Christianity, not as a result of it. Christianity hasn’t preserved, its has subverted, annexed, appropriated in the real sense European culture, into the failing amalgam we see in the Catholicism. That’s a fact, and that’s slowly and steadily emerging. From far earlier times, prior to current narratives, as far back as the church scholars themselves such as the Culdeans, but notably since the epoch of L. A. Waddell and co. To attempt to imply this is a narrative, rooted in a desire to rewrite history in a manner which portraits Pre-Abrahamic Europe favorably for the purpose of ideological propaganda is laughable. Furthermore it’s blatant projection. The historical orthodoxy, which cherry picks from accounts, engages in nepotism, and restricts access, has launched numerous outrageous campaigns of slander, censorship and vandalism to paint a certain historians and their findings as a malicious and subversive. It’s ended numerous careers and even lives. It’s used every fallacious device to sustain itself to this day – from every ivory tower (((Uni)))versity – as a hegemon of History. That’s the problem here, that’s why it’s become unpopular and that’s why ultimately, truth is being outed, but I digress. Truth against the world.

  • William L. Benge Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not mate

    William L. Benge

    Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not materialized into the commons. Personally held opinions which cannot be constructed into a viable argument or claim are either premature or presumption.

    We can take from this the true nature of the popular habit of airing one’s opinion to peers: infantilism by gossip.

    Now, OTOH, if a group of persons is exploring a matter then contributions are transmitted and received by the same discretion (reciprocity).

    But these transmissions do not reach the level of published theory, or declared truth-claim. They’re exploratory. Many errors must be presented in the process of singling out the least erroneous, for the one most truthful.

    This discretion cannot be granted to a party declaring a truth-claim.

    It must be warranted.

    (BAM!)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-14 12:18:00 UTC

  • William L. Benge Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not mate

    William L. Benge Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not materialized into the commons. Personally held opinions which cannot be constructed into a viable argument or claim are either premature or presumption. We can take from this the true nature of the popular habit of airing one’s opinion to peers: infantilism by gossip. Now, OTOH, if a group of persons is exploring a matter then contributions are transmitted and received by the same discretion (reciprocity). But these transmissions do not reach the level of published theory, or declared truth-claim. They’re exploratory. Many errors must be presented in the process of singling out the least erroneous, for the one most truthful. This discretion cannot be granted to a party declaring a truth-claim. It must be warranted. (BAM!)

  • William L. Benge Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not mate

    William L. Benge Unwarrantable positions are not punishable if they are not materialized into the commons. Personally held opinions which cannot be constructed into a viable argument or claim are either premature or presumption. We can take from this the true nature of the popular habit of airing one’s opinion to peers: infantilism by gossip. Now, OTOH, if a group of persons is exploring a matter then contributions are transmitted and received by the same discretion (reciprocity). But these transmissions do not reach the level of published theory, or declared truth-claim. They’re exploratory. Many errors must be presented in the process of singling out the least erroneous, for the one most truthful. This discretion cannot be granted to a party declaring a truth-claim. It must be warranted. (BAM!)

  • ACTUALLY, I CAN’T BE WRONG (ABOUT THIS). SORRY. Information. Decidability. Due D

    ACTUALLY, I CAN’T BE WRONG (ABOUT THIS). SORRY.

    Information. Decidability. Due Diligence. Testimony.

    TRUTH

    4) Tautology exists (and can only exist) two statements that are identical in informational content for a given precision (context). Meaning closure of the constant relations between states (statements).

    3) Truth (Analytic Truth) exists (and can only exist) as a definition of a Truthful statement that is informationally complete (closed). Analytic truths are tautological, with the difference between tautological, and tautology, being deductive necessity. (due to constant relations between states).

    2) Truthfulness (Scientific) exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one has performed due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit in one’s testimony in all the dimensions of possible constant relations.

    1) Honesty exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one’s testimony is free of deceit – but not free of imagination, ignorance, bias, and error.

    DIMENSIONS WE CAN PERFORM DUE DILIGENCE AGAINST

    1 – categorical consistency (equivalent of point)

    2 – internal consistency (equivalent of line)

    3 – external correspondence (equivalent shape/object)

    4 – operational possibility – (equivalent of change [operations])

    5 – rational choice (volition) – (equivalent of time)

    6 – reciprocity (ethics, morality) (equivalent of equilibrium)

    7 – limits, parsimony, and full accounting. (equivalent of proof)

    MATHEMATICAL DEFINITIONS OF DIMENSIONS

    1 – point, (identity, or correspondence)

    2 – line (unit, quantity, set, or scale defined by relation between points)

    3 – area (defined by constant relations)

    4 – geometry (existence, defied by existentially possible spatial relations)

    5 – change (time (memory), defined by state relations)

    6 – pure, constant, relations. (forces (ideas))

    7 – externality (lie groups etc) (external consequences of constant relations)

    8 – reality (or totality) (full causal density)

    GRAMMARS OF CONSTANT RELATIONS (LOGICS) FOR THE DIMENSIONS

    We can speak in descriptions including (at least):

    1 – operational (true) names

    2 – mathematics (ratios)

    3 – logic (sets)

    4 – physics (operations)

    5 – Law (reciprocity)

    6 – History (memory)

    7 – Literature (allegory (possible))

    8 – Literature of pure relations ( impossible )

    8a – Mythology (supernormal allegory)

    8b – Moral Literature (philosophy – super rational allegory)

    8c – Pseudoscientific Literature (super-scientific / pseudoscience literature)

    8c – Religious Literature (conflationary super natural allegory)

    8d – Occult Literature (post -rational experiential allegory )

    INFORMATION

    Sets of constant relations between states (all facts must exist within the context of a theory (rules of states).

    CONSTANT RELATIONS

    Constant Change and Constant persistence, of Constant relations between states (time).

    RELATIONS

    Memory, and mind consists of a hierarchy of neurons that constitute a neural economy, that rewards constant relations, and starves inconstant relations.

    In other words, given that all testimony depends upon incomplete knowledge (a subset of reality), and that all general rules of arbitrary precision are of necessity incomplete, then testimony and therefore law is flasificationary, logics are falsificationary, not justificationary.

    Truth exists only as performative via-negativa warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias and deceit. However, a proof constitutes nothing other than possibility (survival from verbal prosecution).

    Too much for this audience but maybe it will give you ideas.

    ie: constant relations > logic(internal consistency) > math science(measurement -ratio-consistency) > physics(empiricism) > law(testimony) > economics (resources) > group evolutionary strategy (utility) > Philosophy (choice)

    You don’t understand. I CAN’T BE WRONG.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2018-02-14 10:01:00 UTC

  • Actually, I Can’t Be Wrong (About This). Sorry.

    (Note: this version is updated to correctly include operations/actions) Information. Decidability. Due Diligence. Testimony. TRUTH 4) Tautology exists (and can only exist) two statements that are identical in informational content for a given precision (context). Meaning closure of the constant relations between states (statements). 3) Truth (Analytic Truth) exists (and can only exist) as a definition of a Truthful statement that is informationally complete (closed). Analytic truths are tautological, with the difference between tautological, and tautology, being deductive necessity. (due to constant relations between states). 2) Truthfulness (Scientific) exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one has performed due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit in one’s testimony in all the dimensions of possible constant relations. 1) Honesty exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one’s testimony is free of deceit – but not free of imagination, ignorance, bias, and error. DIMENSIONS WE CAN PERFORM DUE DILIGENCE AGAINST 1 – categorical consistency (equivalent of point) 2 – internal consistency (equivalent of line) 3 – external correspondence (equivalent shape/object) 4 – operational possibility – (equivalent of change [operations]) 5 – rational choice (volition) – (equivalent of time) 6 – reciprocity (ethics, morality) (equivalent of equilibrium) 7 – limits, parsimony, and full accounting. (equivalent of proof) MATHEMATICAL DEFINITIONS OF DIMENSIONS 1 – point, (identity, or correspondence) 2 – line (unit, quantity, set, or scale defined by relation between points) 3 – area (defined by constant relations) 4 – geometry (existence, defied by existentially possible spatial relations) 5 – change (time (memory), defined by state relations) 6 – pure, constant, relations. (forces (ideas)) 7 – externality (lie groups etc) (external consequences of constant relations) 8 – reality (or totality) (full causal density) GRAMMARS OF CONSTANT RELATIONS (LOGICS) FOR THE DIMENSIONS We can speak in descriptions including (at least): 1 – operational (true) names 2 – mathematics (ratios) 3 – logic (sets) 4 – operations (actions) 4 – physics (action-limiting forces) 5 – Law (reciprocity) 6 – History (memory) 7 – Literature (allegory (possible)) 8 – Literature of pure relations ( impossible ) 8a – Mythology (supernormal allegory) 8b – Moral Literature (philosophy – super rational allegory) 8c – Pseudoscientific Literature (super-scientific / pseudoscience literature) 8c – Religious Literature (conflationary super natural allegory) 8d – Occult Literature (post -rational experiential allegory ) INFORMATION Sets of constant relations between states (all facts must exist within the context of a theory (rules of states). CONSTANT RELATIONS Constant Change and Constant persistence, of Constant relations between states (time). RELATIONS Memory, and mind consists of a hierarchy of neurons that constitute a neural economy, that rewards constant relations, and starves inconstant relations. In other words, given that all testimony depends upon incomplete knowledge (a subset of reality), and that all general rules of arbitrary precision are of necessity incomplete, then testimony and therefore law is flasificationary, logics are falsificationary, not justificationary. Truth exists only as performative via-negativa warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias and deceit. However, a proof constitutes nothing other than possibility (survival from verbal prosecution). Too much for this audience but maybe it will give you ideas. ie: constant relations > logic(internal consistency) > math science(measurement -ratio-consistency) > physics(empiricism) > law(testimony) > economics (resources) > group evolutionary strategy (utility) > Philosophy (choice) You don’t understand. I CAN’T BE WRONG. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute

  • Actually, I Can’t Be Wrong (About This). Sorry.

    (Note: this version is updated to correctly include operations/actions) Information. Decidability. Due Diligence. Testimony. TRUTH 4) Tautology exists (and can only exist) two statements that are identical in informational content for a given precision (context). Meaning closure of the constant relations between states (statements). 3) Truth (Analytic Truth) exists (and can only exist) as a definition of a Truthful statement that is informationally complete (closed). Analytic truths are tautological, with the difference between tautological, and tautology, being deductive necessity. (due to constant relations between states). 2) Truthfulness (Scientific) exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one has performed due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, and deceit in one’s testimony in all the dimensions of possible constant relations. 1) Honesty exists (and can only exist) as warranty that one’s testimony is free of deceit – but not free of imagination, ignorance, bias, and error. DIMENSIONS WE CAN PERFORM DUE DILIGENCE AGAINST 1 – categorical consistency (equivalent of point) 2 – internal consistency (equivalent of line) 3 – external correspondence (equivalent shape/object) 4 – operational possibility – (equivalent of change [operations]) 5 – rational choice (volition) – (equivalent of time) 6 – reciprocity (ethics, morality) (equivalent of equilibrium) 7 – limits, parsimony, and full accounting. (equivalent of proof) MATHEMATICAL DEFINITIONS OF DIMENSIONS 1 – point, (identity, or correspondence) 2 – line (unit, quantity, set, or scale defined by relation between points) 3 – area (defined by constant relations) 4 – geometry (existence, defied by existentially possible spatial relations) 5 – change (time (memory), defined by state relations) 6 – pure, constant, relations. (forces (ideas)) 7 – externality (lie groups etc) (external consequences of constant relations) 8 – reality (or totality) (full causal density) GRAMMARS OF CONSTANT RELATIONS (LOGICS) FOR THE DIMENSIONS We can speak in descriptions including (at least): 1 – operational (true) names 2 – mathematics (ratios) 3 – logic (sets) 4 – operations (actions) 4 – physics (action-limiting forces) 5 – Law (reciprocity) 6 – History (memory) 7 – Literature (allegory (possible)) 8 – Literature of pure relations ( impossible ) 8a – Mythology (supernormal allegory) 8b – Moral Literature (philosophy – super rational allegory) 8c – Pseudoscientific Literature (super-scientific / pseudoscience literature) 8c – Religious Literature (conflationary super natural allegory) 8d – Occult Literature (post -rational experiential allegory ) INFORMATION Sets of constant relations between states (all facts must exist within the context of a theory (rules of states). CONSTANT RELATIONS Constant Change and Constant persistence, of Constant relations between states (time). RELATIONS Memory, and mind consists of a hierarchy of neurons that constitute a neural economy, that rewards constant relations, and starves inconstant relations. In other words, given that all testimony depends upon incomplete knowledge (a subset of reality), and that all general rules of arbitrary precision are of necessity incomplete, then testimony and therefore law is flasificationary, logics are falsificationary, not justificationary. Truth exists only as performative via-negativa warranty of due diligence against ignorance, error, bias and deceit. However, a proof constitutes nothing other than possibility (survival from verbal prosecution). Too much for this audience but maybe it will give you ideas. ie: constant relations > logic(internal consistency) > math science(measurement -ratio-consistency) > physics(empiricism) > law(testimony) > economics (resources) > group evolutionary strategy (utility) > Philosophy (choice) You don’t understand. I CAN’T BE WRONG. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute

  • Philosophy Is Done: It Is Left With Choice. Truth Is The Purvey Of Science (Due Diligence Of Testimony).

    —” But, What about ethics? What about existentialism?”— Ethics (direct) and Morality (indirect) consists of nothing more than reciprocity. ( Productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer independent of imposition of costs upon the investments of others by externality. ie:the continuous incremental expansion of tort). And unethical and immoral action violates reciprocity (the same rule). Or put more traditionally, the Silver Rule correctly defines ethics and morality. However, since the optimum game strategy is exhaustive investment (not boundless, but exhaustive) in opportunity for cooperation (thats the science), then the Golden Rule (which is secondary to the silver rule) increases the overall condition (productivity of cooperation). As we innovate in both moral and immoral actions, we increase the suppression of immoral actions through the empirical discovery of them in conflicts (tort). Unfortunately, law like norms, tends to lag, and lags more the more governments …. interfere…. with tort law (empirical) discovery and suppression of criminal, unethical, and immoral actions. And worse, while norms usually make their way into legislation or command, (not necessarily tort), the effect of norms is increased by homogeneity and decreased by heterogeneity. Moreover, group evolutionary strategy (moral and immoral both) sometimes requires or advances both ethical/moral, and unethical/immoral behavior, which results in norms that institutionalize unethical and immoral behavior. (Gypsies for example). Anyway. Ethics and morality were an empirical not philosophical discovery. FIctionalisms to choose to invest in different strategies by which we create opportunities were the discovery. Or said more simply: the primary challenge has been the christian one: the extensino of kinship love to non-kin (or at least near kin), but by personal rather than political means. The principle issue with ethics and morality is that in the age of fiat currency we have substituted state insurance for interpersonal extensions, and in doing so eliminated the ability to test for exhaustion vs rent seeking. And the consequences are pretty obvious to the student of history. I think the only questions left to philosophy are aesthetic (individual preferences) and strategies (group goods). Science (Truth) is falsificationary (survival in the evolutionary markets for criticism). But anything that is not false, and not unethical/immoral is a candidate preferential, ethical, and moral good. However, since time and resources are not infinite, we must rally one another around preferences, strategies, and goods. And while we may state them truthfully (operationally), or fictionally (allegorically), they are not matters of truth but of good or preference. And this is, as far as I am able to determine, the role left to philosophy: choice. Truth is and has probably always been, the purvey of what we call ‘science’, or what I would call ‘testimony’.