Theme: Truth

  • 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.

  • Well you know, it’s not like I disagree that religion satisfies a common human w

    Well you know, it’s not like I disagree that religion satisfies a common human want. That’s different from arguing that it’s true. Some of us can handle that duality. Some of us can’t and so can’t balance faith and truth and choose one or the other.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 23:22:35 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363630224588570628

    Reply addressees: @globoHGplex

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363604409855315969

  • IS TRUTH THE RESULT OF FEELZ? (NO). (Part 2) But vocabularies reflect associativ

    IS TRUTH THE RESULT OF FEELZ? (NO). (Part 2)

    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.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 18:14:48 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105770600910988114

  • IS TRUTH THE RESULT OF “FEELZ”? (NO). (Part 1) The neurology says it’s because o

    IS TRUTH THE RESULT OF “FEELZ”? (NO). (Part 1)

    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.

    ( … more … )


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 18:14:01 UTC

    Original post: https://gab.com/curtd/posts/105770597810412831

  • Yes but again we are having this ongoing discussion that law tells us what we ma

    Yes but again we are having this ongoing discussion that law tells us what we may not do, it does not tell us what to do. The truth has told us to evolve, to conquer, to dominate the universe. There is no other criteria of decidabiilty. But we are stuck with the ‘human resource’.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 17:37:43 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363543436956205059

    Reply addressees: @ThruTheHayes @Imperius__13

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363542457804337154

  • Well, that’s an implication that there is not one most parsimonious, consistent,

    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.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 15:44:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363514841059713031

    Reply addressees: @Imperius__13

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363511626473877505

  • Notes on Dyer and Thomas’ first video.

    Jay’s argument should be ‘Logical’ only means internally consistent in the pursuit of an end, vs True, meaning testimonial, meaning testifiable, meaning non-conflationary, consistent, actionable, correspondent, coherent, limited, and complete under realism, naturalism and operationalism, free of loading, framing, suggestion and obscurantism. Ergo as wisdom literature, all faiths are some degree of logical in the sense of internally consistent and utilitarian. They are true in the lower standard of providing a paradigm of action that produces desird ends. They are not “true” in the sense that they are also testifiable.

    The Christian faith is logical within the conflationary system of thought that is not limited by constraints of testimony under realism, naturalism, non-conflation (identity), operationalism (actionability) and correspondence. The fact that Christian theology as wisdom literature has produced the most complete system of non-aggression, tolerance, submission, non-adversarialism, and produces exceptional serfs, peasants, citizens, and to some degree sovereigns is simply a fact because it trains the intuition by continuous reinforcement of the suppression of dominance expression (at rather obvious costs).
    (I’ve come to agree with the criticism of Protestantism largely because it causes doubling down on occultism and sophistry rather than the nearly legalistic discipline of the catholic church. That said, as far as I can tell, the competition between romanticism – the restoration of natural religion – and Christianity, and marxism-secularism in the 1800’s in response to the scientific, industrial, and Darwinian evolution, meant a failure of romanticism was the great missed opportunity to restore our religion of the primacy of man and our transcendence through action INTO gods. The church failed to reform into natural law and science as evidence of our greater understanding of god’s will, and the success of marxism as a materialistic promise of reward in life after revolution in the modern world, like supernatural promise of reward in an afterlife in the ancient world. )
    The problem is that it teaches Christians to lie using the Abrahamic system of lying. Although again, there is a difference between an evolutionary one (science), a beneficial but stagnating wisdom literature (Christianity), a parasitic wisdom lit (Judaism), or a predatory and destructive one (Islam). (Dylan has gone from philosophy(justification) to sophistry (verbalism) to theology (occult). Some of us evolve from mythology to history to science producing testimony. Some of us evolve from mythology to theology to occultism. It depends on whether you were born with the feminine bias in empathic understanding or the masculine bias in analytic understanding. That’s why religiosity is heritable, and those of us who have a lesser NEED for empathy choose the sciences. It’s not complicated. Although we might have to separate just as the left and right must separate. Because as far as I can tell what I think we are seeing is a restoration of demand for speciation now that the agrarian age of homogenization is over.
  • Notes on Dyer and Thomas’ first video.

    Jay’s argument should be ‘Logical’ only means internally consistent in the pursuit of an end, vs True, meaning testimonial, meaning testifiable, meaning non-conflationary, consistent, actionable, correspondent, coherent, limited, and complete under realism, naturalism and operationalism, free of loading, framing, suggestion and obscurantism. Ergo as wisdom literature, all faiths are some degree of logical in the sense of internally consistent and utilitarian. They are true in the lower standard of providing a paradigm of action that produces desird ends. They are not “true” in the sense that they are also testifiable.

    The Christian faith is logical within the conflationary system of thought that is not limited by constraints of testimony under realism, naturalism, non-conflation (identity), operationalism (actionability) and correspondence. The fact that Christian theology as wisdom literature has produced the most complete system of non-aggression, tolerance, submission, non-adversarialism, and produces exceptional serfs, peasants, citizens, and to some degree sovereigns is simply a fact because it trains the intuition by continuous reinforcement of the suppression of dominance expression (at rather obvious costs).
    (I’ve come to agree with the criticism of Protestantism largely because it causes doubling down on occultism and sophistry rather than the nearly legalistic discipline of the catholic church. That said, as far as I can tell, the competition between romanticism – the restoration of natural religion – and Christianity, and marxism-secularism in the 1800’s in response to the scientific, industrial, and Darwinian evolution, meant a failure of romanticism was the great missed opportunity to restore our religion of the primacy of man and our transcendence through action INTO gods. The church failed to reform into natural law and science as evidence of our greater understanding of god’s will, and the success of marxism as a materialistic promise of reward in life after revolution in the modern world, like supernatural promise of reward in an afterlife in the ancient world. )
    The problem is that it teaches Christians to lie using the Abrahamic system of lying. Although again, there is a difference between an evolutionary one (science), a beneficial but stagnating wisdom literature (Christianity), a parasitic wisdom lit (Judaism), or a predatory and destructive one (Islam). (Dylan has gone from philosophy(justification) to sophistry (verbalism) to theology (occult). Some of us evolve from mythology to history to science producing testimony. Some of us evolve from mythology to theology to occultism. It depends on whether you were born with the feminine bias in empathic understanding or the masculine bias in analytic understanding. That’s why religiosity is heritable, and those of us who have a lesser NEED for empathy choose the sciences. It’s not complicated. Although we might have to separate just as the left and right must separate. Because as far as I can tell what I think we are seeing is a restoration of demand for speciation now that the agrarian age of homogenization is over.
  • 7. Unfortunately while P-law exists, you want feels not realz just like the left

    7. Unfortunately while P-law exists, you want feels not realz just like the left wants feelz not realz. So you double down on your various woo woos that you can feel, instead of learning the ‘science’ that would provide you with a model of the world free of woo woo: P-law.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 13:37:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363482972071079944

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363482971232235524


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    6. Because you are all searching for woo woo to organize against and it’s all failing. Becaues you’re just as bad as the left at searching for falsehoods. For the simple reason that developing a model of the world at this scale is very difficult. And P-Logic solves that problem.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1363482971232235524

  • 6. Because you are all searching for woo woo to organize against and it’s all fa

    6. Because you are all searching for woo woo to organize against and it’s all failing. Becaues you’re just as bad as the left at searching for falsehoods. For the simple reason that developing a model of the world at this scale is very difficult. And P-Logic solves that problem.


    Source date (UTC): 2021-02-21 13:37:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363482971232235524

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1363482970431119363


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    5. I try to provide you with P-law which is will allow you to model the world by seeing through or past the distortion, allowing to to correct the distortion, and allowing you together to organize because you see past that distortion.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1363482970431119363