Theme: Truth

  • TRUTH, HONESTY, COSTS, JUSTIFICATION, CRITICISM COSTS OF TRUTH Hierarchy of Trut

    TRUTH, HONESTY, COSTS, JUSTIFICATION, CRITICISM

    COSTS OF TRUTH

    Hierarchy of Truths by internality to externality of costs.:

    1) True enough to imagine a conceptual relationship

    2) True enough for me to feel good about myself.

    3) True enough for me to take actions that produce positive results.

    4) True enough for me to not cause others to react negatively to me.

    5) True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.

    6) True enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different values.

    7) True regardless of all opinions or perspectives.

    8) Tautologically true: in that the two things are equal.

    CATEGORIES OF TRUTH

    1) TRUTH: That testimony (description) you would give, if your knowledge (information) was complete, your language was sufficient, stated without error, cleansed of bias, and absent deceit, within the scope of precision limited to the context of the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possessed of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.

    2) TRUTHFULNESS: that testimony (description) you give if your knowledge (information) is incomplete, your language is insufficient, you have performed due diligence in the elimination of error, imaginary content, wishful thinking, bias, and deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and which you warranty to be so; and the promise that another possessed of the knowledge, performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.

    3) HONESTY: that testimony (description) you give with full knowledge that knowledge is incomplete, your language is insufficient, but you have not performed due diligence in the elimination of error and bias, but which you warranty is free of deceit; within the scope of precision limited to the question you wish to answer; and the promise that another possess of the same knowledge (information), performing the same due diligence, having the same experiences, would provide the same testimony.

    ….CATEGORIES OF HONESTY

    ….3.1 Demonstrated Preference: – Evidence of intuition, preference, opinion, and position as demonstrated by your actions, independent of your statements.

    ….3.2 Position: (criticism) – a theoretical statement that survives one’s available criticisms about external questions.

    ….3.3 Opinion: (justificationism) – a justified uncritical statement given the limits of one’s knowledge about external questions.

    ….3.4 Preference (rational expression) : a justification of one’s biases (wants).

    ….3.5 Intuition: (sentimental expression) – an uncritical, uncriticized, response to information that expresses a measure of existing biases (priors).

    JUSTIFICATION (SUPPORT) VS CRITICISM (SURVIVAL)

    1) OBVERSE: We justify moral arguments given the requirement to preserve the disproportionate rewards of Cooperation, without which survival is nearly impossible. Law and Morality are Contractual, informationally complete, and open only to increases in precision – we know the first principles of cooperation.

    2) REVERSE: We criticize intuitions, hypothesis, theories and laws to remove imagination, error, bias, wishful thinking, and deception from our imaginations in order to identify truth candidates. Reality is Non Contractual, informationally incomplete, and forever open to revision. We do not yet know the fist principles of the universe.

    The reason it took us so long to identify the meaning of truth (Testimony) was that we evolved from moral and cooperative creatures, and we evolved science from moral and cooperative and therefore justificationary reasoning. However, now that we know the first principles of cooperation we can complete the evolution of physical science by adding to it the criticisms necessary for cooperative science:

    Physical Science Criticisms

    i. identity (category)

    ii. internal consistency (logic)

    iii. external correspondence (often called empirical testing)

    iv. existential possibility (existence proof)

    v. limits (falsification) (often called parsimony)

    Additional Cooperative Science Criticisms:

    vi. full accounting (prohibition on selection bias)

    vii. morality (consisting of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfers of property en toto)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-21 11:38:00 UTC

  • I tend to require correspondence in my work, and I try to leave the non-correspo

    I tend to require correspondence in my work, and I try to leave the non-correspondent era behind. I think it was a failure.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-20 17:17:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/623179977924739072

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/622873407693189121


    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/622873407693189121

  • ALL TRUTH IS NEGATIVE IN GOVERNMENT TOO The trick for any government is not to d

    ALL TRUTH IS NEGATIVE IN GOVERNMENT TOO

    The trick for any government is not to do good things. It is not to do bad things. If it’s not bad it must be good. Ascent in the production of commons is illogical.We don’t need to approve contracts for commons. We need only adjudicate them if they create involuntary transfers. Democracy is an inversion of logic. We need juries, not legislatures.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-20 16:40:00 UTC

  • SHORT COURSE IN TESTIMONIAL TRUTH (worth repeating)

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/28/a-short-course-on-propertarianisms-testimonial-truth/A SHORT COURSE IN TESTIMONIAL TRUTH

    (worth repeating)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-20 09:28:00 UTC

  • Don’t attack me. Ever. It’s a moral duty of aristocracy to limit argument to tru

    Don’t attack me. Ever.

    It’s a moral duty of aristocracy to limit argument to truthful discussion of the facts. If you attack me I will attack you back and return to the central argument, and I will not give up until you apologize, surrender, or leave.

    This is a costly means of conducting prosecution of liars and deceivers, but its an aristocratic tax we pay for preservation of the informational commons and our reputations as aristocracy.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-20 07:12:00 UTC

  • There is a vast difference between deducibility in math and an existence proof i

    There is a vast difference between deducibility in math and an existence proof in economics. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-19 19:55:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/622857355621986304

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/622534270104395776


    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/622534270104395776

  • I am quite familiar with the arguments. Math is just a vehicle for addressing th

    I am quite familiar with the arguments. Math is just a vehicle for addressing the problem of truth in economics. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-19 19:53:07 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/622856714237407232

    Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/622533142218346496


    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/622533142218346496

  • We Have A Simple Choice


    [T]ruth, Trade and Liberty (Propertarianism) 

    –vs–

    [L]ies, Takings, and Authority (Socialism)

     

    (Choose wisely.)

  • We Have A Simple Choice


    [T]ruth, Trade and Liberty (Propertarianism) 

    –vs–

    [L]ies, Takings, and Authority (Socialism)

     

    (Choose wisely.)

  • What Is Critical Rationalism?

    [C]ritical Rationalism is an epistemology developed for scientific inquiry. It is the inverse of justificationary rationalism. ASSERTIONS: 1) That justificationism tells us us nothing about truth content (you can support something as much as you want but that does not make it true.) 2) That the means of creating an hypothesis are irrelevant. Instead, if hypothesis survives all possible criticism, it remains a truth candidate. 3) That the evolutionary sequence: intuition, hypothesis, theory, law, and tautology applies universally, and that justificationary language is merely false. 4) That even if we identify a very parsimonious truth candidate with broad explanatory power, we may never know if it is the most parsimonious truth candidate possible (“the truth”). 5) That we cannot choose between the likelihood of competing theories (“critical preference”). (I see this as a guiding logical or moral principle but not an empirical one.)

    SUMMARY One’s testimony (promise of truth) can rely upon: ……..1) Justification: An Impersonal Proof of Truth; –or– ……..2) Criticism: A Personal Warranty against imaginary content, error, bias, wishful thinking, and deception. Since the first is impossible, we are left with the second. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine (London)