P-Law eliminates all lying.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-19 01:27:03 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1461506272419852288
Reply addressees: @hoeberian @fukiffyknow
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1461504854367641603
Theme: Truth
-
THE END OF THE SUPERNORMAL AND SUPERNATURAL The desperate attempt to preserve th
THE END OF THE SUPERNORMAL AND SUPERNATURAL
The desperate attempt to preserve the supernatural persists no matter how much we falsify the false promises.
— “I have been wondering if your ideas are worth reading. You are obviously a materialist (spiritual non-believer. Everything in MY subjective conscious experience tells me that you don’t really don’t ‘get it’. Bottom line – consciousness is not an emergent property of the brain. It is non local and the physical brain is nothing more than a very sophisticated computer/transceiver. But this is only my perception due to subjective experience. Bless you.” — Gary Chartrand
I just know the science. And like the long history of gradual development of scientific knowledge, it has incrementally deprived us of the promise of ‘undiscovered countries’ of the imagination that soften the burdens of a reality that is all but hostile to life. And that the end of our long journey we discover that there is nothing supernormal, supernatural, in the production of consciousness and those alternatives to reality that have comforted us, fade like our innocence and ignorance, leaving us to create them from the existing universe we are stuck with. However, the fact that we can not only predict the actionable world we live in, imagine what scales beyond our perception, but imagine worlds that might be, allows us to hope and try to bring about those worlds within the laws of the universe and the universe’s god, and in doing so become the gods we imagine, in the worlds and gardens we imagine. Bless you too.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-19 00:15:03 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107300841300546396
-
First Principle: A first principle is a basic proposition or assumption that can
First Principle: A first principle is a basic proposition or assumption that cannot be deduced from any other proposition or assumption.
irreducibility
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-18 01:00:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1461137100481380358
Reply addressees: @Ozpin_88
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1461129176753348611
-
“Objective”: testimony warrantied as limited to realism, naturalism, operational
“Objective”: testimony warrantied as limited to realism, naturalism, operationalism, rational choice, and reciprocity.
That’s the same thing as scientific claim or legal testimony.
So yes, objective facts exist.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-17 19:18:00 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1461051012064722948
-
DUMB F—KS IN THE WHITE MOVEMENT — “grug, math.” — Math isn’t hard. Knowing w
DUMB F—KS IN THE WHITE MOVEMENT
— “grug, math.” —
Math isn’t hard. Knowing what’s wrong with math (mathiness) is a bit hard. Knowing the difference between math, computation, operations, and cooperative transactions is hard. Knowing how to disambiguate all methods of computation (Grammars) isn’t hard. Knowing how to produce decidability across math, computation, operations, transactions, is fairly hard. Knowing how to construct formal law from that hierarchy is fairly hard. In other words, a single specialization tends to reinforce general ignorance, while comparative disciplines, in particular, comparison across all disciplines is quite hard because one must master every discipline.
So, If you can’t comprehend it you can’t. Others can. Others do. And in particular, some mathematicians do, and that is why we are reforming mathematics to merge it with computation and operation and reversing counter-revolution against mathematics that began with Cantor and the attempt to unify mathematics and logic by set theory instead of (obviously in retrospect) unifying mathematics, computation, algorithm, operations, and set (verbal logic), with operations devolving into math on one end, and into set logic (verbal) on the other, by the removal of dimensions of subjectively testable reality.
The reality is that you’re a chimp by comparison. You can’t even imagine that P-Law is as great a leap as empiricism was over theology, or science over empiricism, and is as meaningful as was darwin to biology.
That’s ok. I wouldn’t expect you to. However, I do understand that others do and do demonstrate that knowledge.
“You are but a measure of your own ignorance.”
Cheers. 😉
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 19:30:23 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/107282735003581114
-
That said, given the four sciences: Formal(Logics), Physical, Behavioral, and Ev
That said, given the four sciences: Formal(Logics), Physical, Behavioral, and Evolutionary, why would we expect that truth and law, the logic of cooperation and morality, economics and politics, groups and group evolutionary strategy to require less study than the other sciences?
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 15:40:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460271453807562755
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460270243281092608
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
It’s the same with my work. Newbs find something I write or say and then jump to some conclusion that’s false. Or they complain that it’s incoherent or complex or word salad. The answer is you learn math, programming, p-law, and formal logic by STUDY not by ANALOGY.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1460270243281092608
-
I don’t think there is any magic to it. It’s like anything else. People may want
I don’t think there is any magic to it. It’s like anything else. People may want a single insight like they get with ideology or philosophy or theology. But P-Law is in the same categorical hierarchy as math, programming, (P-Law,) formal (Verbal) logic. You have to PRACTICE it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-15 15:33:57 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460269849704382470
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1460269186266152966
IN REPLY TO:
Unknown author
THINKING:”How do I teach others how to think about all existence, life, thought, feeling, and behavior operationally – by construction from first principles – by disambiguation into first principles?” Well, you list the first principles and gradually learn(habituate) the process.
Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1460269186266152966
-
H: Ignore accusations that are simply pretense of knowledge, pretense of skill,
H: Ignore accusations that are simply pretense of knowledge, pretense of skill, pretense of objectivity, as a means of lying and denying.
Intellectually honest people don’t do it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-14 03:18:12 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1459722306624929801
Reply addressees: @hoeberian @highdigger44
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1459721825064210432
-
Never confuse religious literature with reality. These stories exist to inspire
Never confuse religious literature with reality. These stories exist to inspire the powerless, not limit the powerful/
The truth is always simple: will to power.
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-13 01:44:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1459336365808791554
Reply addressees: @Daemon_Knight40
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1459334941427261446
-
This is a far better description of praxeology: we cannot predict human behavior
This is a far better description of praxeology: we cannot predict human behavior but we can explain it. Ergo all logics are falsificationary. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1459254664365494277
Source date (UTC): 2021-11-12 20:20:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1459254894922190856
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1459254664365494277