Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • RT @elonmusk: The BBC interview last week was exceptional in illustrating why yo

    RT @elonmusk: The BBC interview last week was exceptional in illustrating why you cannot rely on the media for truth

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-16 10:46:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647552069845352449

  • Psychologizing, like moralizing, is an anti-social retreat into the evasion of a

    Psychologizing, like moralizing, is an anti-social retreat into the evasion of argument by the sequence of denial, undermining, rallying, reputation destruction, and social construction of cognitively feminine behavior.

    The most common cause is the cognitively feminine inability to tolerate violations of their self image, status, and sexual, social, economic,and political market value.

    Either one can make an argument or not.
    Either one can produce outputs demonstrating one’s ability or not.

    Failure to make an argument is demonstrating one lacks ability – and using denying, lying, undermining, rallying, and social construction demonstrates one lacks basic ethical and moral character.

    Reply addressees: @ThreeSDNordid @GarryNestlerJr @jollyheretic @charlesmurray

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-16 09:38:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647534971140145158

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647512410649919488

  • Psychologizing, like moralizing, is an anti-social retreat into the evasion of a

    Psychologizing, like moralizing, is an anti-social retreat into the evasion of argument by the sequence of denial, undermining, rallying, reputation destruction, and social construction of cognitively feminine behavior.

    The most common cause is the cognitively feminine inability to tolerate violations of their self image, status, and sexual, social, economic,and political market value.

    Either one can make an argument or not.
    Either one can produce outputs demonstrating one’s ability or not.

    Failure to make an argument is demonstrating one lacks ability – and using denying, lying, undermining, rallying, and social construction demonstrates one lacks basic ethical and moral character.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-16 09:38:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647534971232440322

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647512410649919488

  • Do you teach responsibility for self determination by self determined means, and

    Do you teach responsibility for self determination by self determined means, and responsibility for requring others to do the same, and the responsibility of truth before face regardless of consequences, and basic behavioral and micro economics, or that adversarial conflict and competition resulting in discovery of previously unknown opportunties for all, or that western civ was the only one to survive exhaustion of agrarian civiization and subsequent stagnation decline after 800ad of every other civ, or that this demand for the maximization of individual responsibilty for both the private and the common is the reason you have the opportunity to engage in teaching children the exact oppposite?

    Reply addressees: @terrilbruce @GregAbbott_TX

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-16 02:23:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647425519611179008

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647390208814350336

  • Do you teach responsibility for self determination by self determined means, and

    Do you teach responsibility for self determination by self determined means, and responsibility for requring others to do the same, and the responsibility of truth before face regardless of consequences, and basic behavioral and micro economics, or that adversarial conflict and competition resulting in discovery of previously unknown opportunties for all, or that western civ was the only one to survive exhaustion of agrarian civiization and subsequent stagnation decline after 800ad of every other civ, or that this demand for the maximization of individual responsibilty for both the private and the common is the reason you have the opportunity to engage in teaching children the exact oppposite?

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-16 02:23:46 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647425519665786881

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647390208814350336

  • lol… Just keep spreading that salt of realism in the wounds of magical thinkin

    lol… Just keep spreading that salt of realism in the wounds of magical thinking….

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-15 15:07:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647255331314061313

    Reply addressees: @Dan_a_rama

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647246850389426177

  • It’s also a request that was denied at the cost of the process and possibly the

    It’s also a request that was denied at the cost of the process and possibly the outcome. There is a fallacy that names the justification you just used. Do you know which fallacy it is?

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-15 14:50:39 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647251093754109952

    Reply addressees: @T12Texas @lawofruby

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1647246192365936642

  • NOW, WATCH GPT-4 FAIL WITHOUT A SPECIFIC PROMPT: PROMPT –“Can you precisely lis

    NOW, WATCH GPT-4 FAIL WITHOUT A SPECIFIC PROMPT:

    PROMPT
    –“Can you precisely list the criteria for Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth?”–

    Yes, I can list the criteria for Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth.

    Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth is a method for determining the… https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1646937234170339329

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-14 19:10:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1646954142475100161

  • CHATGPT-4 AND TESTIMONIAL TRUTH DETAILED PROMPT: –“In Curt Doolittle’s Testimon

    CHATGPT-4 AND TESTIMONIAL TRUTH

    DETAILED PROMPT:
    –“In Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth, he refers to tests of realism, naturalism, identity (unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, bounded rational choice, reciprocal bounded rational choice, stated with causal parsimony, and with stated limits, with full accounting within those limits, and warrantied by due diligence. What do each of these requirements mean?”–

    Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth is a method for determining the truthfulness of a statement made by a person. The method involves several requirements, including tests of realism, naturalism, identity (unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, bounded rational choice, reciprocal bounded rational choice, stated with causal parsimony, and with stated limits, with full accounting within those limits, and warrantied by due diligence. Here’s what each of these requirements means:

    Realism: The statement should be based on the actual state of the world and should accurately reflect reality. This means that the statement should not be based on imaginary or unrealistic assumptions.

    Naturalism: The statement should be consistent with the laws of nature and should not rely on supernatural or unexplained phenomena.

    Identity (unambiguity): The statement should be clear and unambiguous, without any room for misinterpretation or confusion.

    Logical consistency: The statement should be internally consistent and should not contradict itself or any other known facts.

    Operational possibility: The statement should be capable of being tested or verified through empirical observation or other means.

    External correspondence: The statement should correspond to external reality and should be consistent with other known facts and observations.

    Bounded rational choice: The statement should be based on the assumption that individuals make rational choices within the constraints of their knowledge and resources.

    Reciprocal bounded rational choice: The statement should be based on the assumption that individuals interact with each other through reciprocal, bounded rational choices.

    Stated with causal parsimony: The statement should be stated in the simplest possible terms and should not rely on unnecessary or complicated explanations.

    Stated limits: The statement should be clear about its limitations and should not make claims beyond the scope of its evidence or authority.

    Full accounting: The statement should be supported by a full accounting of the evidence and reasoning used to arrive at the statement.

    Warrantied by due diligence: The speaker must have performed due diligence in arriving at the statement and must be willing to accept legal and ethical responsibility for the truthfulness of the statement.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-14 18:03:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1646937233906081808

  • CHATGPT-4 AND TESTIMONIAL TRUTH DETAILED PROMPT: –“In Curt Doolittle’s Testimon

    CHATGPT-4 AND TESTIMONIAL TRUTH

    DETAILED PROMPT:
    –“In Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth, he refers to tests of realism, naturalism, identity (unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, bounded rational choice, reciprocal bounded rational choice, stated with causal parsimony, and with stated limits, with full accounting within those limits, and warrantied by due diligence. What do each of these requirements mean?”–

    Curt Doolittle’s Testimonial Truth is a method for determining the truthfulness of a statement made by a person. The method involves several requirements, including tests of realism, naturalism, identity (unambiguity), logical consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, bounded rational choice, reciprocal bounded rational choice, stated with causal parsimony, and with stated limits, with full accounting within those limits, and warrantied by due diligence. Here’s what each of these requirements means:

    Realism: The statement should be based on the actual state of the world and should accurately reflect reality. This means that the statement should not be based on imaginary or unrealistic assumptions.

    Naturalism: The statement should be consistent with the laws of nature and should not rely on supernatural or unexplained phenomena.

    Identity (unambiguity): The statement should be clear and unambiguous, without any room for misinterpretation or confusion.

    Logical consistency: The statement should be internally consistent and should not contradict itself or any other known facts.

    Operational possibility: The statement should be capable of being tested or verified through empirical observation or other means.

    External correspondence: The statement should correspond to external reality and should be consistent with other known facts and observations.

    Bounded rational choice: The statement should be based on the assumption that individuals make rational choices within the constraints of their knowledge and resources.

    Reciprocal bounded rational choice: The statement should be based on the assumption that individuals interact with each other through reciprocal, bounded rational choices.

    Stated with causal parsimony: The statement should be stated in the simplest possible terms and should not rely on unnecessary or complicated explanations.

    Stated limits: The statement should be clear about its limitations and should not make claims beyond the scope of its evidence or authority.

    Full accounting: The statement should be supported by a full accounting of the evidence and reasoning used to arrive at the statement.

    Warrantied by due diligence: The speaker must have performed due diligence in arriving at the statement and must be willing to accept legal and ethical responsibility for the truthfulness of the statement.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-04-14 18:03:29 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1646937234170339329