Theme: Truth

  • Let me help you with a bit more truth

    Let me help you with a bit more truth

    Let me help you with a bit more truth… https://t.co/1CULc4Upsv


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-12 13:15:51 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271431020081025024

    Reply addressees: @yat_es @Outsideness

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271367729451339776

  • Sometimes I write true things that scare me

    Sometimes I write true things that scare me…


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 17:40:00 UTC

  • “You cannot just be able to handle the truth you have to be able to handle payin

    —“You cannot just be able to handle the truth you have to be able to handle paying the price when you speak it. Speaking the truth today requires sacrifice and pain. You have got to have the strength to stand tall when most will hate you for it. I believe that is the trial of leadership.”—Joshua Moye


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 15:17:00 UTC

  • Truth Regardless of Cost

    Truth Regardless of Cost https://t.co/hutzLXpbvS

  • Truth Regardless of Cost

    Truth Regardless of Cost https://propertarianism.com/2020/06/11/truth-regardless-of-cost/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-06-11 15:06:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1271096365620367361

  • Truth Regardless of Cost

    I have to use the truth without compromise regardless of cost. We can make explicit tolerances and exceptions for the un-testimonial and irreciprocal, but we cannot violate reciprocity by stating untruths without violating the promise of the law: in-group reciprocity in display word and deed, regardless of cost. It doesn’t matter if we turn people away. If they are unfit for the truth, unfit for the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, then they are unfit for transcendence into the gods we imagine – and must be either left behind, or ruled, so that they cannot prohibit our transcendence into the gods we imagine.

  • Truth Regardless of Cost

    I have to use the truth without compromise regardless of cost. We can make explicit tolerances and exceptions for the un-testimonial and irreciprocal, but we cannot violate reciprocity by stating untruths without violating the promise of the law: in-group reciprocity in display word and deed, regardless of cost. It doesn’t matter if we turn people away. If they are unfit for the truth, unfit for the physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, then they are unfit for transcendence into the gods we imagine – and must be either left behind, or ruled, so that they cannot prohibit our transcendence into the gods we imagine.

  • A scientist testifies

    A scientist testifies A philosopher opines A theologian recites Testimony: The secret of western civilization. === Andrew M Gilmour So what are the prerequisites for honest/truthful testimony? Ontic: Realism (Domain, Category, property/quality, Genea) Epistemic: Empirical (external verification) Logical: correspondent (comparison, relational) Grammatical: Etymologically consistent Rhetorical: Honesty (witnessing, due diligence) I think i’m getting closer. === Andrew ; you’re getting stuck because you’re trying to map law (realism, action ) to philosophy (idealism, words) and philosophy is insufficient for the task. TRY THIS: Metaphysics: Premises (Action, Actionability) … Ontology: realism/naturalism, soft determinism, three faculties: physical, intuition, and reason, and mind as motion (no name for it in philosophical terms: experience consists of continuous recursive hierarchical temporal memory – memory of memory continuously constructed by continuous prediction from sequences of sense perception.) the problem is getting people from the observer to perception consisting of change (action) not state. Grammars: Communication, Speech: (Actions) … Meaning, … Stories, Explanation, Justification, … [List: Deflationary, Descriptive, Inflationary Grammars] Epistemology: Adversarialism (Actions) … Falsification, Due Dilligence … Three phases, … … 1 – discovery, … … 2 – due diligence, … … 3 – testimony: … 1. Epistemology – Discovery process): … Free association > Test ( Reason) > NextOrFail … … Hypothesis > Test (Calculation) > NextOrFail … … … Theory > Test (Action) > NextOrFail … … … … Theory > Test (Market) > NextOrFail … … … … … Law > Fail … 2. Epistemology – Due Diligence process) … Adversarial Survival by tests of … … Complete Sentences … … In promissory form … … In operational vocabulary (as actions) … … absent the verb to-be (is, are, was, were…) … … including all changes in state … … including all consequences of change in state … … from an observer’s point of view … … producing a series of testable transactions. … Where the Criteria for Truthful Speech Is: … Coherence Across the Dimensions Testifiable by Man, … in The Series: … … Categorically Consistent (Non-conflationary, Differences) … … Internally Consistent (Logical) … … Externally Correspondent (Empirical) … … Operationally Consistent (Consisting of Operational Terms that are Repeatable and Testable) … … Rational Choice (Consisting of Rational choice, in available time frame) … … Reciprocal (Consisting of Reciprocally Rational Choice) … With Stated Limits and Fully Accounted (Defense against cherry picking and inflation) … Warrantied … … (i)as having performed due diligence in the above dimensions; … … (ii)where due diligence is sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility; … … (iii)and where one entertains no risk that one cannot perform restitution for. As a Defense Against the Series: … Ignorance and Willful Ignorance; … Error and failure of Due Diligence; … Bias and Wishful Thinking; … And the many Deceits of: … … (a) Loading and Framing; … … (b) Suggestion, Obscurantism, and Overloading and Propaganda; … … (c) Fictionalisms of Sophisms, Pseudorationalisms, Pseudoscience, and Supernaturalism; … … (d) and outright Fabrications (fictions). … In Defense or Advocacy Of: … Any transfer that is not reciprocal, the tests of: … … (a) productive … … (b) fully informed, fully accounted … … (c) warrantied and within the limits of liability … … (d) voluntary … … (e) free of externality of the same criteria … Including but Not Limited To … The Series of: … … (a) murder, … … (b) harm, damage, theft, … … (c) fraud, fraud by omission, fraud by indirection,baiting into hazard … … (d) free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of commons, … … (e) rent seeking, monopoly seeking, conspiracy, statism/corporatism, … … (f) conversion(religion/pseudoscience), … … (g) displacement(immigration/overbreeding), … … (h) conquest (war). … 3. Epistemology – Testimony process. … … Adversarial competition between Search and Test. … … Search Criteria … … … Narrative … … Test Criteria … … … Operationalism: Actions … … … … Testimony in operational terms (one continuous consistent commensurable system of falsifiable measurement, consisting of a fully accounting, of a series of transactions (stories) of changes in state.)

  • A scientist testifies

    A scientist testifies A philosopher opines A theologian recites Testimony: The secret of western civilization. === Andrew M Gilmour So what are the prerequisites for honest/truthful testimony? Ontic: Realism (Domain, Category, property/quality, Genea) Epistemic: Empirical (external verification) Logical: correspondent (comparison, relational) Grammatical: Etymologically consistent Rhetorical: Honesty (witnessing, due diligence) I think i’m getting closer. === Andrew ; you’re getting stuck because you’re trying to map law (realism, action ) to philosophy (idealism, words) and philosophy is insufficient for the task. TRY THIS: Metaphysics: Premises (Action, Actionability) … Ontology: realism/naturalism, soft determinism, three faculties: physical, intuition, and reason, and mind as motion (no name for it in philosophical terms: experience consists of continuous recursive hierarchical temporal memory – memory of memory continuously constructed by continuous prediction from sequences of sense perception.) the problem is getting people from the observer to perception consisting of change (action) not state. Grammars: Communication, Speech: (Actions) … Meaning, … Stories, Explanation, Justification, … [List: Deflationary, Descriptive, Inflationary Grammars] Epistemology: Adversarialism (Actions) … Falsification, Due Dilligence … Three phases, … … 1 – discovery, … … 2 – due diligence, … … 3 – testimony: … 1. Epistemology – Discovery process): … Free association > Test ( Reason) > NextOrFail … … Hypothesis > Test (Calculation) > NextOrFail … … … Theory > Test (Action) > NextOrFail … … … … Theory > Test (Market) > NextOrFail … … … … … Law > Fail … 2. Epistemology – Due Diligence process) … Adversarial Survival by tests of … … Complete Sentences … … In promissory form … … In operational vocabulary (as actions) … … absent the verb to-be (is, are, was, were…) … … including all changes in state … … including all consequences of change in state … … from an observer’s point of view … … producing a series of testable transactions. … Where the Criteria for Truthful Speech Is: … Coherence Across the Dimensions Testifiable by Man, … in The Series: … … Categorically Consistent (Non-conflationary, Differences) … … Internally Consistent (Logical) … … Externally Correspondent (Empirical) … … Operationally Consistent (Consisting of Operational Terms that are Repeatable and Testable) … … Rational Choice (Consisting of Rational choice, in available time frame) … … Reciprocal (Consisting of Reciprocally Rational Choice) … With Stated Limits and Fully Accounted (Defense against cherry picking and inflation) … Warrantied … … (i)as having performed due diligence in the above dimensions; … … (ii)where due diligence is sufficient to satisfy the demand for infallibility; … … (iii)and where one entertains no risk that one cannot perform restitution for. As a Defense Against the Series: … Ignorance and Willful Ignorance; … Error and failure of Due Diligence; … Bias and Wishful Thinking; … And the many Deceits of: … … (a) Loading and Framing; … … (b) Suggestion, Obscurantism, and Overloading and Propaganda; … … (c) Fictionalisms of Sophisms, Pseudorationalisms, Pseudoscience, and Supernaturalism; … … (d) and outright Fabrications (fictions). … In Defense or Advocacy Of: … Any transfer that is not reciprocal, the tests of: … … (a) productive … … (b) fully informed, fully accounted … … (c) warrantied and within the limits of liability … … (d) voluntary … … (e) free of externality of the same criteria … Including but Not Limited To … The Series of: … … (a) murder, … … (b) harm, damage, theft, … … (c) fraud, fraud by omission, fraud by indirection,baiting into hazard … … (d) free riding, socialization of losses, privatization of commons, … … (e) rent seeking, monopoly seeking, conspiracy, statism/corporatism, … … (f) conversion(religion/pseudoscience), … … (g) displacement(immigration/overbreeding), … … (h) conquest (war). … 3. Epistemology – Testimony process. … … Adversarial competition between Search and Test. … … Search Criteria … … … Narrative … … Test Criteria … … … Operationalism: Actions … … … … Testimony in operational terms (one continuous consistent commensurable system of falsifiable measurement, consisting of a fully accounting, of a series of transactions (stories) of changes in state.)

  • You Double Down? You Fail.

    Y’all can hate me for the truth. But the truth is how we solve the problem. We need more services in addition to religion. Beaus only fe feminine biased personality can tolerate the high cost of denial of reality in exchange for the frictionless extroverted experience of religion. I SOLVE THE PROBLEM YOU DOUBLE DOWN ON AND FAIL. (and y’all hate me for it) Truth is the most powerful weapon. It’s just an expensive one.