(FB 1542209378 Timestamp) Karl Popper created (from aristotle, weber, and pareto) the method of analytic philosophy I make use of, which includes Definitions, Series, Lists, Tables, and parentheticals. He used italics a lot but italics aren’t available or I would us Italics where I use Initial Capitals to denote the name of a definition in a series I have defined elsewhere.
Theme: Truth
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542209378 Timestamp) Karl Popper created (from aristotle, weber, and pareto) the method of analytic philosophy I make use of, which includes Definitions, Series, Lists, Tables, and parentheticals. He used italics a lot but italics aren’t available or I would us Italics where I use Initial Capitals to denote the name of a definition in a series I have defined elsewhere.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542218874 Timestamp) They Talk About Ideals, and We Talk About Reals – The Difference Is Costs – We Account for Costs.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542481626 Timestamp) Um. Don’t feel bad when you PM me questions and I say “I don’t know.” … I say so because I don’t know. But it’s not an imposition to ask me a question I don’t know the answer to. The secret to being right is to be careful about what you say you know. And saying “I don’t know” is the shortest way of doing that. The difference is that we all like attention and we all like to solve puzzles, and we all like to opine. Thankfully I don’t need attention, I hate puzzles instead of problems, and I f–king opine and argue all day long already… lol
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542481626 Timestamp) Um. Don’t feel bad when you PM me questions and I say “I don’t know.” … I say so because I don’t know. But it’s not an imposition to ask me a question I don’t know the answer to. The secret to being right is to be careful about what you say you know. And saying “I don’t know” is the shortest way of doing that. The difference is that we all like attention and we all like to solve puzzles, and we all like to opine. Thankfully I don’t need attention, I hate puzzles instead of problems, and I f–king opine and argue all day long already… lol
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542557719 Timestamp) GOVERNING IS SIMPLE IF TRUTHFUL AND DIFFICULT IF DECEITFUL AND CORRUPT by JG Garner Agreed. Black and white. Dark or light. North or south. East or west. I read a book a few years back. A book well known to many. I will paraphrase the general idea. The author wrote governing is not hard. It is easy. The corrupt make it complicated. The compromised make the waters murky. Itâs simple. Is it good for the nation? Is it good for the economy? Does it weaken us? Do we want those convicted of the most heinous crimes to still breath. As long as they live, they could be amongst us âfree menâ again. Iâve provided a small paragraph on an entire chapter. But you get my point. Things should be pretty cut and dry. In the criminal justice system we now look at the accused in a sympathetic view. Was his life hard? Did his parents beat him? Ect. The only thing we need to unwind is was a crime committed? Did the accused commit said crime? Is the victim dead or injured.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542557719 Timestamp) GOVERNING IS SIMPLE IF TRUTHFUL AND DIFFICULT IF DECEITFUL AND CORRUPT by JG Garner Agreed. Black and white. Dark or light. North or south. East or west. I read a book a few years back. A book well known to many. I will paraphrase the general idea. The author wrote governing is not hard. It is easy. The corrupt make it complicated. The compromised make the waters murky. Itâs simple. Is it good for the nation? Is it good for the economy? Does it weaken us? Do we want those convicted of the most heinous crimes to still breath. As long as they live, they could be amongst us âfree menâ again. Iâve provided a small paragraph on an entire chapter. But you get my point. Things should be pretty cut and dry. In the criminal justice system we now look at the accused in a sympathetic view. Was his life hard? Did his parents beat him? Ect. The only thing we need to unwind is was a crime committed? Did the accused commit said crime? Is the victim dead or injured.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542552724 Timestamp) THE OUTSTANDING QUESTION: CAN IT BE DONE? —“I do not think German philosophy was a reaction to empiricism.”—Aaron Kahland —“Thinking Kant’s love affair with Rousseau being a German reaction to Anglo liberalism – secular Christian apologetics”—Bill Joslin I mean, british empiricism begins back in the 1090’s and within two hundred years becomes explicit under roger bacon. and by the 1600’s under Francis bacon all but complete. leading to hobbes, lock, hume, smith, et al. The bacons were jurists applying law to modern thought. Instead, Germans less so with leibnitz but certainly with wolff and kant continued the scholastic tradition of apriorism independent of empiricism, and when that failed moved to experientialism, and finally to the nonsense of marx and heidegger. These people were theologians applying theology to modern thought. The great questions, which dogs my work, are: (a) is this internal world of the germans and external world of the anglos genetic or cultural (linguistic, traditional, normative, literary, institution) or a mixture of both? (b) Given the difference between british (shallow), american (constitutional) and the german (metaphysical) moral depth be TAUGHT by design, and by what methods can it be taught. Because it appears to require both an institutional method of teaching AND sufficient immersion in the culture to produce the general disposition, and; (c) how can we teach as such while also training the opposite (sun tzu, machiavelli, grand strategy) that this “piety” or ‘moralism’ is a utility and a choice not a truth? Because it is the LATTER PROBLEM that seems to be the issue, not the former. In other words, today you talk to germans and they are convinced of this ‘nonsense’ that they have a special history rather than did the logical thing as all other peoples in history have done. (and arguably were in the right in both wars). Brits are in a virtue spiral of death for the same reason. Americans are incrementally defeated by their women for the same reason. And as far as I can tell it is christianity underneath that causes these failures – because it is ideal and unlimited, rather than limited and real (limits of tolerance and forgiveness)
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542678665 Timestamp) I am almost at the point where listening to economists sounds like listening to marxists, sounds like listening to theologians. All the same. Testimonialism is a necessity for human evolution.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1542637994 Timestamp) By claiming one is doing good, one can justify bads. But while bads are decidable and universal, goods are only preferable and particular. As such one claims he does good only as an excuse to do bad. When, one only does good if he does NO bad. Ergo, all that is not bad is good.