@Sylivie Wow another lie-and-denier??? I do the truth. You do the lie. It’s apparently your destiny to be a liar.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-02 18:17:24 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106863437046071036
@Sylivie Wow another lie-and-denier??? I do the truth. You do the lie. It’s apparently your destiny to be a liar.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-02 18:17:24 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106863437046071036
So again, hilbert et al were more right than einstein-bohr. Darwin, menger, spencer nietzche more right than marx, freud, boaz. Hayek more right than Keynes. blackstone more right than … anyway. The point is. it’s GENETIC as well as cultural.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-02 13:44:36 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433425630050209797
@RadioFreeNorthwest That’s the net of it. German philosophy seems to have succeeded where religion didn’t. I’m trying to find a way to write a proof of that.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-02 00:09:16 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106859158332413033
@RadioFreeNorthwest Humility as they mean it is evasion of responsibility for discovery of the truth so that they can evade responsibility for failure. All feminine cognition, emotion, and instinct consists of attempts to evade costs so that ‘men’ pay them instead.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-01 23:51:44 UTC
Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/106859089418923899
RT @LukeWeinhagen: @WorMartiN @curtdoolittle Indeed.
You can not derive a consistent set of behaviors based on lies when reality forces th…
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-01 19:07:32 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433144510452797445
If you understand the logical construction of rule of law by natural law, and that this is consistent, correspondent, and coherent with the formal, physical, behavioral, and evolutionary laws, you can falsify any and all political statements — easily. I know, because I teach it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-01 15:00:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433082447181328396
Reply addressees: @jordanbpeterson
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432591572047208451
If you don’t know the historical construction of rule of law, and its convergence with philosophical natural law (laws of nature) then you can’t falsify claims to legal legitimacy (legal truth claims)
Source date (UTC): 2021-09-01 14:57:44 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1433081647893733378
Reply addressees: @jordanbpeterson
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432591572047208451
So Michael and I have gone through enough of this work to understand the structure of his theory. It is the most parsimonious, coherent and operationally constructed theory I have found. It rests on a set of testable premises. The math is incomplete, and it hasn’t been tested. https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1432393577024430080
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-31 22:36:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432834815653556224
https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/1432393577024430080
I don’t know. I’m just working top down through the entire work now. this introductory chapter with the logic of the ‘theory of everything’ so to speak, is brutal. The method was easy by comparison.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-31 15:47:37 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432731813739380737
Reply addressees: @WorMartiN
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432731337203621894
Yeah but in the end it’s pretty easy. write a sequence of complete sentences, covert to operational prose, and then test against the list of dimensions that are testable (truth, reciprocity, ternary logic of behavior. It just takes a long time to internalize it.
Source date (UTC): 2021-08-31 00:55:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432507261235171331
Reply addressees: @EricLiford
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1432497006275145738