Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • THE TRUTH: MAKING HONEST CAN’T VS SHOULD ARGUMENTS If you’re making a “CAN’T” ar

    THE TRUTH: MAKING HONEST CAN’T VS SHOULD ARGUMENTS

    If you’re making a “CAN’T” argument, then just admit it’s because you can’t. If you’re making a “SHOULD or SHOULDN’T” argument, then state why you should or shouldn’t. But if you’re making a can’t argument while saying it’s because you shouldn’t, then that’s not truth that’s deception.

    It’s true that you CAN’T hold Russia accountable for attacking Ukraine, breaking the postwar consensus, and restarting nuclear proliferation, but that doesn’t me you shouldn’t.

    Truth is true. Lie is Lie. Unknown is Unknown. It’s not complicated.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-05 03:43:00 UTC

  • RESTORING LIBERTY: VIOLENCE, TRUTH AND COMMONS 1) First I put VIOLENCE back into

    RESTORING LIBERTY: VIOLENCE, TRUTH AND COMMONS

    1) First I put VIOLENCE back into liberty. (reciprocal insurance and militia)

    2) Then I put TRUTH back into liberty. (propertarian ethics, testimonial truth, and operationalism).

    3) Now I am putting the COMMONS back into liberty.

    Correcting a Century of Pseudoscience, Deception and Immorality – One Concept at a Time.

    THE RESTORATION: Aristocratic Egalitarianism, Propertarianism, and Testimonial Truth.

    (Yes, I am a bit giddy now. Yea. You would be too.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-05 02:50:00 UTC

  • END THE LIES: TRUTH, NOT GUILT

    END THE LIES: TRUTH, NOT GUILT

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-05 02:00:00 UTC

  • Truth – Defense Against The Dark Art Of Playing A Sucker

    Truth – Defense Against The Dark Art Of Playing A Sucker

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-05 01:58:00 UTC

  • AN ADVANCEMENT ON E-PRIME, I THINK? CHANGING IT FROM PREFERENCE FOR MEANING TO N

    AN ADVANCEMENT ON E-PRIME, I THINK? CHANGING IT FROM PREFERENCE FOR MEANING TO NECESSITY FOR TESTIMONY?

    I’ve been reading more on General Semantics and their meme E-Prime, and it’s pretty interesting how they advocate GS/E’ for the purpose of clarity and meaning.

    Now, I advocate E’ and Operationalism because one cannot testify to the truth of a statement if one cannot state it in operational language. Because you can’t possibly state that you know what you’re talking about.

    So, I think my argument in favor of E’ as a moral and ethical constraint, (and in the case of negative externalities, a criminal constraint) is stronger than the argument for ‘clarity and meaning’.

    ON A MY CONTINUED FRUSTRATION WITH A PRIORISM AS A VERBALISM

    I’ve still got to address the strange a priorist argument that there is something particularly interesting about decreasing precision (making general statements). Yes we can drop properties of many similar instances in order to construct sets of commons properties, and give them names. But this is an inverse of the problem of making general observations and investigating which properties we observe are necessary and which are not.

    Some descriptions, if made more precisely have no meaning: “wind” and “wave” are pretty good examples. At human scale they are meaningful statements. below human scale they are not. All statements of precision have maximum and minimum points of demarcation.

    I mean, i guess if you start with instrumentalism, you implicitly start with human scale and the problem of precision and arbitrary precision as necessary properties of any description (theory).

    I just guess this is one of those things that’s so obvious to me that I can’t imagine a literary alternative because I did not learn philosophy by literary (allegorical) means.

    Curt

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-04 04:49:00 UTC

  • Karl Brooks wins the Propertarian smart of the month award. 🙂 —– Experience

    Karl Brooks wins the Propertarian smart of the month award. 🙂

    —–

    Experience – Apprehending sensory or mental events.

    Thinking – The mental process of reviewing what one knows and integrating that knowledge to create new knowledge or to calculate a probable result.

    Reasoning – Using heuristics to aid thinking.

    Rationalism – The belief that deductive reasoning, starting from either a priori intuitive knowledge or an established premise, is the optimum heuristic for gaining new knowledge.

    Scientific Descriptions – Descriptions of results obtained through the operations known as the scientific method.

    Operational Definitions – Defining discreet actions and results, labeling them with a unique name, and arranging them in a specific order. A cumulative process where each ordered set is also labeled with a unique name. Used to assemble complex constructions which demonstrate an empirically constructed truth, or identify component failure leading to falsification, of a specific ordered set.

    Analytic Rationalism – Existence exists. (Ok, that’s just a stab at it. Don’t know about this one, I know the difference between and analytic and synthetic proposition, but have not come across the term used with rationalism).

    Formal Logic – A specific language construction that allows inferences to be followed. The two branches I know of are syllogistic and symbolic. Here’s a syllogism I wrote about 10 years ago:

    God is truth

    Truth is love

    God is love.

    You’re scientism friends with love that one (heh)!

    Symbolic logic is the use of variables:

    A = B

    B = C

    A = C.

    Mathematics – Synthetic propositions expressed in symbolic logic.

    Arithmetic – Calculations using uniquely named components that have physical correspondence (real numbers).

    Naming – Unique identifying label.

    —-

    Karl Brooks (Rational numbers, not real numbers).

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-04 04:37:00 UTC

  • Tell the truth: Anglo Do your duty: German Find a way: Jewish Say I am supposed

    Tell the truth: Anglo

    Do your duty: German

    Find a way: Jewish

    Say I am supposed to say: Chinese.

    Truth Is A Risky Thing, understood but avoided: Russian

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-03 06:05:00 UTC

  • GETING CLOSER : UNIVERSALISM AND HIGH TRUST Integration into a high trust polity

    GETING CLOSER : UNIVERSALISM AND HIGH TRUST

    Integration into a high trust polity, without damage (without parasitism or conquest), requires high trust, which in turn requires, truth telling, the nuclear family with prohibition on cousin marriage, legal enforcement of not only criminal but both ethical and moral prohibitions, codified as property rights, universal standing and loser-pays, use of the common language, eliminating of separatist dress, and celebration of the same holidays, and contributory production.

    Cultural heterogeneity in the sense, that we aggregate into neighborhoods and rely on different rituals and signals within our tribes, is only possible if we adopt all theses high trust constraints.

    The problem is that while we do that and people from every society can volunteer to do that, many people prefer to host in a high trust society as parasites. And for many groups, it is a necessary reproductive advantage. And advantage without which they would be absorbed into the polity at the loss of their identity.

    So in this sense, you can retain your signaling identity but not your reproductive and competitive strategies.

    I think that is enough to separate those who wish to integrate from those who wish to conduct parasitism.

    WE GET AROUND OUR CURSE OF ALTRUISM WITH TRUTH, CALCULABILITY, AND UNIVERSAL ENFORCEMENT BY UNIVERSAL STANDING.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-03 03:12:00 UTC

  • CAN WE PLAY A GAME? (learn something interesting) 1) So, can you explain the dif

    CAN WE PLAY A GAME?

    (learn something interesting)

    1) So, can you explain the difference between the following terms?

    – Experiencing

    – Thinking

    – Reasoning

    – Rationalism

    – Scientific Descriptions

    – Operational Definitions

    – Analytic Rationalism

    – (Formal) Logic

    – Mathematics

    – Arithmetic

    – Naming

    The structure of this list isn’t arbitrary. And it should tell you something very important.

    **Operationalism** + **Testimonal Truth**

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-01 08:43:00 UTC

  • THE CHOICE OF TERMS: “TESTIMONIAL TRUTH” I was going to go with performative tru

    THE CHOICE OF TERMS: “TESTIMONIAL TRUTH”

    I was going to go with performative truth, which is an established term, but which applies to formal languages and is already heavily loaded within the analytic movement. So I’m going to go with “Testimonial Truth” because it is easily understood and not encumbered by existing loadings.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-01 07:46:00 UTC