Theme: Truth

  • For this reason, philosophy is largely sophistry, ideology is almost entirely di

    For this reason, philosophy is largely sophistry, ideology is almost entirely dishonest, and theology is universally deceit.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-23 15:25:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364234865969946624

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364234318533562374


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    If you start with a presumed outcome you will fail. If you start with the search for truth and attempt to discover options that are limited by the truth then your mathematical, scientific, legal, political, and philosophical – and yes, theological, solutions will be ‘true’.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1364234318533562374

  • If you start with a presumed outcome you will fail. If you start with the search

    If you start with a presumed outcome you will fail. If you start with the search for truth and attempt to discover options that are limited by the truth then your mathematical, scientific, legal, political, and philosophical – and yes, theological, solutions will be ‘true’.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-23 15:23:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1364234318533562374

  • Sorry no. Totally unrelated. Thanks for asking. (Just coming to terms: Truth is

    Sorry no. Totally unrelated. Thanks for asking.

    (Just coming to terms: Truth is an equal opportunity offender until everyone is equally otherwise hopeless, offended, threatened, or hurt by consequences that the truth is the only compromise remaining.)


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 18:42:48 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363922203423756289

    Reply addressees: @Imperius__13

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363921364193796104

  • No, you can’t testify to the existence of god, a soul, heaven or hell, or any mi

    No, you can’t testify to the existence of god, a soul, heaven or hell, or any miracles, or that God can do anything whatsoever. You can only testify to having FAITH in them DESPITE that they aren’t tesifiable. We know what causes your religiosity. It’s not magic. Need != True.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 18:25:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363917758757556226

    Reply addressees: @TheLuckyOne520

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363912702507311104

  • Social construction of falsehood in order to defend against truth. It’s not that

    Social construction of falsehood in order to defend against truth.
    It’s not that bad a falsehood. But it’s a falsehood.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 18:01:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363911796562792448

    Reply addressees: @TheLuckyOne520

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363911499228528641

  • People contact me all the time suggesting that I temper my pursuit of truth for

    People contact me all the time suggesting that I temper my pursuit of truth for the utilitarian advantage of conforming to and advancing whatever pragmatic deception they excuse – becuase they use it themselves. Trut his what it is, and it is enough. If you are unfit for it….?


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 17:25:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363902795682893832

  • I am not trying to get anyone who has to lie on my side. If the truth isn’t enou

    I am not trying to get anyone who has to lie on my side. If the truth isn’t enough then it isn’t. I’m trying to build a foundation of law, a set of policies under that law, and a judiciary for an Inquisition.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 15:58:26 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363880841156395013

    Reply addressees: @Dune711

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363878822681202688

  • At present, and most likely for the coming decades, I’m the living authority on

    At present, and most likely for the coming decades, I’m the living authority on the difference between truth and lies.

    We know the name of the devil. His name was Abraham. He was from Ur. He invented the science of lying by seduction by false promise, producing addiction.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 14:20:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363856313558720516

    Reply addressees: @TheLuckyOne520

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363853371002748929

  • The P-Law (Natural Law) Program Consists of: 1 – The completion of the scientifi

    The P-Law (Natural Law) Program Consists of:

    1 – The completion of the scientific method and all that it entails – which is a lot – and that’s why P is such a big program: it touches every discipline, and it converts almost all psychological, social, and political speech to economic expressions – which is counter-intuitive because it’s scientific where our current psychological social, moral, and political speech is only normative or in the case of psychology sociology and politics, both pseudoscientific and sophomoric.
    We call this Testimonialism (Metaphysics, Epistemology, Psychology, Ethics, Sociology, Politics)

    2 – The explanation for western success in ancient and modern worlds (adaptive velocity because of our individual sovereignty and resulting traditional law of property/tort.) And the explanation for the dark ages as well as the current attempt to repeat them that we see as undermining western civilization.
    We call this Western Group Evolutionary Strategy.

    3 – The explanation of the different systems of argument used in the different civilizations, and in particular the Abrahamic means of deceit used in the ancient world (Judaism, Christianity, Islam) and in the modern world (marxism, feminism, postmodernism, denialism/political correctness).
    We call this The Grammars (deflationary, testimonial, ordinary, fictional, and the fictionalisms)

    4 – A constitution, body of law, and attendant policies that restore the American, English, Anglo Saxon, Germanic, Western Indo-European (Aryan), constitution (contract among sovereigns) and hardens it from future undermining, by creating a legal means for the prosecution of crimes of undermining, including religious (Jewish Islamic), pseudoscientific, and sophomoric (Marx, Freud, boas, Adorno, Derrida, Friedan, and marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism/political correctness), as well as the financing of undermining by prohibiting rent-seeking, privatization of commons, and socialization of losses).
    We call this a new or updated constitution.

    5 – A set of policies (Acts) under that constitution that form the most substantial political, social, economic, and financial reform since the roman era – restoring the civil society.
    We call these the reforms: the policies under the constitution

    6 – A set of Restitutions and Punishments that serve to return wealth to the American people, punish those who have engaged in undermining our people, and prevent repeats of undermining our people – or other peoples – in the future.
    We call these the Restitutions

    7 – A program of revolution and restitution of the constitution of natural law and our European strategy that we have used to drag ourselves and mankind out of ignorance, superstition, oppression, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, child mortality, early death, and the chaos of a nature all but hostile to our existence. And an explanation why the world is our debtor and hates us for it.
    We’ll call this the Revolution


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-22 03:40:13 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105772824252393505

  • Is Truth the Result of “Feelz”? (no).

    IS TRUTH THE RESULT OF “FEELZ”? (NO). The neurology says it’s because of the absence of feels. Given the absence of intuition all that remains is consistency correspondence and possibility. Females need intuition for children. Some of us maintain the feminine. Some of us are free of it. Rule(M) > Govern(MF) > Obey(F) Well, that’s an implication that there is not one most parsimonious, consistent, correspondent, and actionable paradigm for producing decidability. But there is. I’m trying to eliminate the left’s method of lying. The problem is, that eliminates everyone’s method of lying. The fact that it’s cognitively masculine is merely a fact. The fact that alternatives appear to be cognitively feminine is merely a fact. Those are the two directions of cognitive bias the brain can and does evolve. So if we want to say we need narratives that assist the range of human beings across the cognitive spectrum in coordinating their actions then that is fine. As long as they aren’t false. And as long as they don’t persist the Abrahamic method of deception. Which is ‘the problem’. So just as we need heroic ethics(empathy), rule ethics (reason), and outcome ethics(knowledge), we need Mythology(empathy), Philosophy(reason), and Science(Evidence), because we are children, adults, and aged. And all three must be coherent and scale up and down gracefully w/ us. Yes but reality is a costly data and algorithm set, given the distribution of age, and ability. We must provide wisdom lit for the young to old, and dim to wise. So the problem I see is that while I might state the first causes, they are too precise a tool for imprecise minds. Twitter and FB are sketchpads that assist in understanding how to simplify complex ideas so that they are within reach of the better of the common folk. But vocabularies reflect associative paradigms whether physical-actionable-observable, verbal-analogistic-sophistic, or intuitionistic-emotional-occult. There are only so many logics available to the human mind since we are always dependent upon those three human faculties. So it is always possible to disambiguate any claim whether physical, verbal, or intuitionistic because we can only associate those three categories. and falsification is dependent on that sequence : auto-association(memory) > intuition(model) > organization(language) > action It is this possibility of disambiguation which allows commensurability between the three sensory paradigms., Its this commensurability and disambiguation and deflation that the mystic and the sophist hates, because it eliminates loading framing and suggestion (manipulation). On the other hand we cannot take the simple mind of man, and his unorganized instincts and make him a fully human agent without a pedagogical sequence. Of narrative, to general rule, to specific prescription. So this is why we need a spectrum. But we cannot agree on that spectrum without a victor to which the other two factions must find survival by latching onto a competitor’s victory. My hypothesis is that truth is optimum competitive advantage, and philosophy and religion follow.