I would argue it’s entirely understandable, but that we tolerate so much lying that all but a few of us can’t filter wheat from chaff and therefore presume the world isn’t understandable. 😉
(I mean, I teach how to, and it’s hard, but the team will explain that it’s possible.)
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 23:56:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656448089375354880
Reply addressees: @ScienceMonthly
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656446055574310917
BELIEVE WHAT SCIENCE?
(I deal with this every single day.)
–“Around a third of studies published in neuroscience journals, and about 24% in medical journals, are “made up or plagiarized,” according to a new paper.”–via Science
Worse, that doesn’t account for the studies that are just bad science, bad statistics, logically ridiculous, or contain nonsense claims not supported by the evidence. And yes I’m talking about behavioral sciences here, as well as the non-sciences that dress up in costume and claim they’re sciences.
Worse, even that doesn’t account for the *implications* the papers produce by means of suggestion.
Worse, generally speaking, if a paper supports the “gated institutional narrative” you can nearly guarrantee it’s false.
So trust the science? It’s like trusting politicians, advertizers, and financial advisors. For the same reason: malincentives.
Scientific papers must be treated as court testimony. Meaning if one performs due diligence, then one can err, but not mislead by statement, inference, or suggestion.
Thanks.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 23:55:51 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656447994697334784
The term connect refers to a physical contact between two different referents.
Like the verb to-be, which most use to pretend knowledge we don’t have, or pretend mode of existence or identity by conflation or inflation, you’re using “connect” in the same sense.
What you mean is “do our brains identify a pattern of relations from which we might inform or modify our behavior”. Things aren’t connected. We observe true or false, relationships between them.
Things aren’t connected. We identify relationshps between them.
Reply addressees: @FernandoGLV1212
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 23:41:07 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656444284839575552
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656431504837210120
Worse, you’re presuming we don’t live in a primarily liars-all system already. How do you know you’re not lying? One can intend to lie, or one can lie by failure of due diligence against lying. In either case one performs and distributes a falsehood. I’ve only interacted with you a few times and I have a pretty good grasp on what you’re lying about by trying to justify a construction. Does that mean yu’re a bad person? No. It means you just don’t know yet.
Reply addressees: @FernandoGLV1212
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 22:44:15 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656429974893613056
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656428410804084738
SEARCH FOR THE TRUE FIRST, GOOD SECOND.
Most law seeks the good first without regard to the true. The science of the physical laws seeks the truth regardless of the good, because, obviously, the material world can’t choose. Unfortunately, philosophers and theologians search for the good as if it were true – and this is why they failed. The science of the natural law of cooperation seeks the true, discovers it is also good, simply because it isn’t bad, and defines good as anything not bad – and as such we can choose among only goods. leaving us to choose individually and collectively to prioritize goods. So in the Natural Law we search for the truth of the bad, leaving the choice of the good for the self, others, and the polity. And despite that, Mankind acts at greatest degree of immorality (bad) it can get away with, by desperately searching for discounts (‘efficiencies’) by doing bads instead of goods, and claiming bads are goods in both defense and offense. Liars all.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-10 20:27:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656395590194933761
I can’t testify to god.
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 22:48:46 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656068724040904705
Reply addressees: @superkanga
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656067417989083141
If I call you a bad person using opinion vs. I call you a criminal with evidence, why is that obfuscation?
Instead you’re trying to emote.
And take the bait.
Which is why you lose
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 21:07:33 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656043250946326550
Reply addressees: @Will86042755099 @TOOEdit
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656042750926569503
RT @elonmusk: Trust nothing, not even nothing
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-09 20:01:14 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1656026563270385667
THE CAPITALISM SOCIALISM DICHOTOMY IS NONSENSE
1) The capitalism socialism dichotomy is an intentional distraction from Rule of Law by Natural Law producing moral markets and prosperity and Rule by Man By Arbitrary Dictate producing black markets and poverty.
2) So there is a difference between Anglo Liberalism, French Socialism, German/Italian (Fascist) Socialism, and Jewish (communist) Socialism. Anglo Liberalism maximizes private sector ownership and production while publicly financing collective objectives, with limited insurance. French Socialism maximizes social insurance with limited state control of production. German/Italian Socialism demands private sector production prioritize state collective objectives, maximizes everyone’s productivity. Jewish(communist) socialism all but eliminates private property and runs the economy centrally as military organization, thus eliminating wages and wage competition. Chinese socialism is really german/italian fascism but with global markets.
3) All polities rely on mixed economies, and the central problem countries face, is that the economic and political model is dependent upon the trust of the society. Europeans focused on high trust and gradually invented every single major revolution whether economic or intellectual. The “backward” countriers try to update the economy before producing high trust. This is why most experiments fail. A small, ethnically homogenous high trust polity will be able to enage in nearly any economic order. A low trust polity can’t do much at all – well, and for long.
4) We produce high trust by rule of law as close to natural law as possible. This requires a military and near universal service in it (indoctrination), from there a hierarchy of courts and sufficient sherrifs to investigate crimes and enforce rulings. Everything else is just frosting on the cake.
Reply addressees: @janevoe1 @toodarkmark
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-08 14:58:17 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655587932634324992
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655567073781727233
POSITIVE LAW ISN’T LEGITIMATE AND THEREFORE “LAW” BUT NATURAL LAW IS LEGITIMATE AND THEREFORE “LAW”
Explanation: Laws of Nature (physical, behavioral, evolutionary, and logical) then the Natural Law of Cooperation within the limits of the laws of nature (natural duties, rights, inalienations) that prohibit negative behaviors and construct ‘the order’ of cooperation, then legislative contracts within the limits of the natural law of cooperation (contractual duties, rightts and inalienations) that produce positive behaviors, then private contracts within the limits of the legislative laws, the natural laws, and the laws of nature, that produce private commons, and then informal signals, manners, norms, traditions, values that facilitate cooperation – and so we have laws of nature, natural law, legislative contracts of the commons, private contracts of the private sector, and normative contracts independent of assets (demonstrated intersts), and findings of the hierarchy of courts of the empircal, common law.
While Natural Law prohibits all authority thereby requiring Concurrency in positive legislation, and Commonality in negative dispute resolution across regions, classes (and now sexes), limiting us to *decidability* and therefore to *science*, Positive Law is an attempt to create a ruling class (Russia France, Judaism) that violates the self determination of individuals, families and groups, by violating the inaliebiity right and obligation for reciprocal insurance of self determination by self determined means, by test of sovereignty in demonstrated interest, and reciprocity in display word and deed, limiting us to voluntary competitive markets for cooperation in association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war, and aversarial markets for dispute resolution before a jury of our peers (or voluntary duel, or fight, or argument).
Under this formulation of the natural scientific, law of cooperation, there is no difference between what is moral and what is legitmate (legal). In fact the entire structure of it, beginning with self determination by soverignty and reciprocity, prohibiting authority, requiring a means of decidability, consists of the criteria for deciding what actions are moral and legitimate, and therefor enforcible laws, within the limits of the natural law of cooperation and laws of nature, without violating morality, which we discovred scientifically through the long term empirical tests of commonality and concurrency: the natural law itself.
Cheers
Curt Doolittle
The Natural Law Institute
Source date (UTC): 2023-05-08 14:27:49 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1655580266604158978