Theme: Truth

  • Could We Falsify All Human Speech in Court?

    Jan 5, 2020, 2:48 PM We can, and do, falsify all human action in court. The question was, could we falsify all human speech in court. The answer is yes. The usual problem is that someone wants an ideology(political) philosophy (secular theological), or theology (supernatural theological) solution – which is impossible. Because Science (truthful testimony) is falsificationary. As far as I know, P is complete. And there are no false or ir-reciprocal statements that can survive its falsification. That fact that people can’t get their noggins around the fact that all science (testimony) like markets (competition) is falsificationary is a common problem. But it stems from a failure to understand that science is falsificationary, then demanding P, like philosophy, ideology, or religion be justificationary. It’s not. So they criticize P for not being a science on the one hand by false presumption science is justificationary, and then complain P isn’t justificationary. Kind of silly really, but you can see where they get it from. Most people are stuck in the error of “Mathiness” because they don’t grasp the constitution of, or limits of, mathematics. Math breaks down in all three directions: the very small, the very large, and the very-human (cognitive): economics. If you need a positive theology, philosophy, ideology, sophism, or pseudoscience, then I understand the via-positiva is necessary for simple minds. But grownups are not afraid of via-negativa (skepticism), because we know all non trivial non tautological propositions are contingent, because we may always or nearly always, discover some novel parsimony that allows us to reorganize our paradigms for greater consistency, correspondence, coherence, completeness and parsimony than before.

  • What Does Truth Mean?

    What Does Truth Mean? https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/26/what-does-truth-mean-3/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-26 21:06:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265388930272296963

  • What Does Truth Mean?

    Jan 5, 2020, 7:31 PM Existence refers to persistence. The universe exists, and the matter in it exists, because it persists – we can identify that it exists because we posses memory. We can identify patterns of constant relations in that persist in that universe – that universe is deterministic at any scale at which we can identify patterns of constant relations. We can generalize those patterns of constant relations. We can identify unique instances of those patterns of constant relations. We can name them. We name states(nouns), substitutes for states (pronouns), and properties of states (adjectives), operations (verbs), and properties of operations (adverbs) and we can agree or disagree (yes/no, agree disagree, approve reject) We can form and speak(display word and deed) transactions(phrases) and transaction sets (sentences), and sets of transaction sets (stories) We can agree with those transactions, transaction sets, and sets of transaction sets (true/false) We can speak in promise, suggestion, question, agreement, opposition, or silence. When we claim we speak truthfully we speak promissorily. One can speak truthfully or untruthfully. When we speak truthfully we speak coherently with categorically, internally (logically), externally (empirically), operationally(sequence of actions) consistency, and use due diligence to disambiguate any possibility of misinterpretation. We can speak untruthfully because of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, deceit, and denial. We are forever ignorant so while we have discovered how to gradually iterate to the most parsimonious hierarchy of consistent and commensurable paradigms (networks of continuous relations at given scales, and in given contexts), in that set of Grammars we call “science”. Truth can and only can consist of language in some grammar or other, reducible to analogy to experience, testable by human logical facility. So while patterns of constant relations exist in the universe, and we can name those patterns, that thing we call truth consists of language humans discover, organize and iteratively refine through a process of continuous recursive disambiguation as information increases. The human mind works by using sequences of stimuli (patterns) to produce predictions of fragments, object, models, spaces(places), borders, locations, and episodes. The mind then recursively predicts possibilities from those predictions using auto association. We then use attention to choose which auto associations to permute upon. This is how we imagine, and control what we imagine. Because we can imagine, we imagine that truth exists, when only phenomenon exists ,and truth consists of the formula by which we describe it. Man discovers constant relations and creates truthful descriptions of those constant relations. Truthful statements are made by man because only man (so far) speaks. When we say honest we say the speaker promises his words are free of suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, deceit and denial. When we say truthful, we mean, that operational name (description) which is not false, and satisfies market demand for decidability in the given context, given the present knowledge, and free of bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit, where the individual uttering it has performed due diligence against ignorance and error. When we claim a statement is true we promise that it satisfies market demand for decidability given the context. When we agree that a statement ‘is true’ that means that we AGREE that it satisfies market demand for decidability given the context. When we say ‘the truth’ we mean either a parsimonious operational name for the constant relations we refer to, or the MOST parsimonious name for the constant relations we refer to. Of the various civilizations which has produced the only method of due diligence with which to speak the most parsimonious categorically consistent, internally consistent, externally correspondent, operational, complete, and fully accounted operational names? Of the various civilizations which has paid the high cost of normalizing truth before face regardless of cost to self, competence, dominance hierarchy? Only man speaks, only man describes, only man describes in operational names, only operational names are complete and commensurable, only complete and commensurable operational names are parsimonious, only parsimony provides minimum difference between the most parsimonious possible and the current state of knowledge. I could work on this further but you get the point. That truth must be discovered, named, and uttered (in some form). Truth is made. Truth is uttered, Truth is promised, Truth satisfies the market demand for decidability. We consent to that decidability by equal means -or we do not. The universe merely exists.

  • What Does Truth Mean?

    Jan 5, 2020, 7:31 PM Existence refers to persistence. The universe exists, and the matter in it exists, because it persists – we can identify that it exists because we posses memory. We can identify patterns of constant relations in that persist in that universe – that universe is deterministic at any scale at which we can identify patterns of constant relations. We can generalize those patterns of constant relations. We can identify unique instances of those patterns of constant relations. We can name them. We name states(nouns), substitutes for states (pronouns), and properties of states (adjectives), operations (verbs), and properties of operations (adverbs) and we can agree or disagree (yes/no, agree disagree, approve reject) We can form and speak(display word and deed) transactions(phrases) and transaction sets (sentences), and sets of transaction sets (stories) We can agree with those transactions, transaction sets, and sets of transaction sets (true/false) We can speak in promise, suggestion, question, agreement, opposition, or silence. When we claim we speak truthfully we speak promissorily. One can speak truthfully or untruthfully. When we speak truthfully we speak coherently with categorically, internally (logically), externally (empirically), operationally(sequence of actions) consistency, and use due diligence to disambiguate any possibility of misinterpretation. We can speak untruthfully because of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, deceit, and denial. We are forever ignorant so while we have discovered how to gradually iterate to the most parsimonious hierarchy of consistent and commensurable paradigms (networks of continuous relations at given scales, and in given contexts), in that set of Grammars we call “science”. Truth can and only can consist of language in some grammar or other, reducible to analogy to experience, testable by human logical facility. So while patterns of constant relations exist in the universe, and we can name those patterns, that thing we call truth consists of language humans discover, organize and iteratively refine through a process of continuous recursive disambiguation as information increases. The human mind works by using sequences of stimuli (patterns) to produce predictions of fragments, object, models, spaces(places), borders, locations, and episodes. The mind then recursively predicts possibilities from those predictions using auto association. We then use attention to choose which auto associations to permute upon. This is how we imagine, and control what we imagine. Because we can imagine, we imagine that truth exists, when only phenomenon exists ,and truth consists of the formula by which we describe it. Man discovers constant relations and creates truthful descriptions of those constant relations. Truthful statements are made by man because only man (so far) speaks. When we say honest we say the speaker promises his words are free of suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, deceit and denial. When we say truthful, we mean, that operational name (description) which is not false, and satisfies market demand for decidability in the given context, given the present knowledge, and free of bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism, and deceit, where the individual uttering it has performed due diligence against ignorance and error. When we claim a statement is true we promise that it satisfies market demand for decidability given the context. When we agree that a statement ‘is true’ that means that we AGREE that it satisfies market demand for decidability given the context. When we say ‘the truth’ we mean either a parsimonious operational name for the constant relations we refer to, or the MOST parsimonious name for the constant relations we refer to. Of the various civilizations which has produced the only method of due diligence with which to speak the most parsimonious categorically consistent, internally consistent, externally correspondent, operational, complete, and fully accounted operational names? Of the various civilizations which has paid the high cost of normalizing truth before face regardless of cost to self, competence, dominance hierarchy? Only man speaks, only man describes, only man describes in operational names, only operational names are complete and commensurable, only complete and commensurable operational names are parsimonious, only parsimony provides minimum difference between the most parsimonious possible and the current state of knowledge. I could work on this further but you get the point. That truth must be discovered, named, and uttered (in some form). Truth is made. Truth is uttered, Truth is promised, Truth satisfies the market demand for decidability. We consent to that decidability by equal means -or we do not. The universe merely exists.

  • Silly People, Sophistry-Trix Are for Kids!

    Silly People, Sophistry-Trix Are for Kids! https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/26/silly-people-sophistry-trix-are-for-kids/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-26 21:02:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265387921693081601

  • The Main Propertarian Innovations and Clarifications that Complete Western Law a

    The Main Propertarian Innovations and Clarifications that Complete Western Law and Aristotelian Epistemology. https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/26/the-main-propertarian-innovations-and-clarifications-that-complete-western-law-and-aristotelian-epistemology/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-26 20:58:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265386825776054272

  • “My Current Copy/paste of What Is P Is”

    Jan 6, 2020, 8:29 PM THE MAIN PROPERTARIAN INNOVATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS THAT COMPLETE WESTERN LAW AND ARISTOTELIAN EPISTEMOLOGY. by Alain Dwight My current copy/paste of what is P is pretty much a break down at the narrative level: Here’s what I think the main Propertarian innovations/clarifications are that complete western (common/tort) law and Aristotelian epistemology. 1 – Testimonilaism: The tests you can use to attempt to falsify a claim and truth as real rather an ideal, meaning truth is an adjective meaning “claim I can warranty has survived all means of falsification known to man” Link: https://propertarianinstitute.com/2018/01/14/what-does-truth-mean-and-what-is-its-adjective-form/ 2 – Law as descriptive (framed as the science of co-operation and agency): retaliation and high trust can be deterministically predicted based on measuring reciprocity and impositions against property-en-toto. Errosion of trust erodes social norms and this cascades down to the rest of commons required to accumulate agency and retain sovereignty. Natural law says “if you do this your group will fail.” Common/tort law is men saying “we’re not going to let you do this because we refuse to be a failed group.” 3 – Property-en-toto: all investments acquired without violating reciprocity that a person is willing and able to defend (whereas certain forms of damage against normative and informational commons were exploitable loopholes in tort law – hence we see hte industrialization of professional deception) 4 – Reciprocity as deterministic: reciprocity will be exchanged by co-operation when interactions are “productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntarily exchanged, and free of imposition upon others by externality.” Otherwise reciprocity will be exchanged by means of conflict.

  • “My Current Copy/paste of What Is P Is”

    Jan 6, 2020, 8:29 PM THE MAIN PROPERTARIAN INNOVATIONS AND CLARIFICATIONS THAT COMPLETE WESTERN LAW AND ARISTOTELIAN EPISTEMOLOGY. by Alain Dwight My current copy/paste of what is P is pretty much a break down at the narrative level: Here’s what I think the main Propertarian innovations/clarifications are that complete western (common/tort) law and Aristotelian epistemology. 1 – Testimonilaism: The tests you can use to attempt to falsify a claim and truth as real rather an ideal, meaning truth is an adjective meaning “claim I can warranty has survived all means of falsification known to man” Link: https://propertarianinstitute.com/2018/01/14/what-does-truth-mean-and-what-is-its-adjective-form/ 2 – Law as descriptive (framed as the science of co-operation and agency): retaliation and high trust can be deterministically predicted based on measuring reciprocity and impositions against property-en-toto. Errosion of trust erodes social norms and this cascades down to the rest of commons required to accumulate agency and retain sovereignty. Natural law says “if you do this your group will fail.” Common/tort law is men saying “we’re not going to let you do this because we refuse to be a failed group.” 3 – Property-en-toto: all investments acquired without violating reciprocity that a person is willing and able to defend (whereas certain forms of damage against normative and informational commons were exploitable loopholes in tort law – hence we see hte industrialization of professional deception) 4 – Reciprocity as deterministic: reciprocity will be exchanged by co-operation when interactions are “productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntarily exchanged, and free of imposition upon others by externality.” Otherwise reciprocity will be exchanged by means of conflict.

  • Perceptions of Possibility and Probability Are Always Determined by Knowledge

    Perceptions of Possibility and Probability Are Always Determined by Knowledge https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/26/perceptions-of-possibility-and-probability-are-always-determined-by-knowledge/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-26 14:12:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1265284636281843712

  • Perceptions of Possibility and Probability Are Always Determined by Knowledge

    Jan 7, 2020, 10:23 AM One’s perspective on the chances of separation are determined by (a) knowledge of military history, strategy, and end of Westphalian and restoration of traditional conflict (4gw). (b) knowledge of the fragility of the USA, and its cities, how rapidly it will collapse, and how it can be exploited, ( c) knowledge of a compromise solution that will minimize resistance. If you have a history of life achievement and know these things, it’s just ‘work’: another project that needs doing. it’s not a problem of knowing what to do. This isn’t a time for democratic majoritarianism. it’s a time for a minority to force ultimatums.