Curt Doolittle

Theme: Truth

  • reminder: I”m an anti-philosophy philosopher. I do science, economics, and law.

    reminder: I”m an anti-philosophy philosopher. I do science, economics, and law. Everything else is fictionalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 15:24:08 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991699869424345093

  • EXISTENCE —“It’s worth distinguishing between the knowledge of a referrer and

    EXISTENCE

    —“It’s worth distinguishing between the knowledge of a referrer and the existence of its referent. We clearly know of the referrer (concept) we call ‘unicorn’, and might someday be able to bring some approximation of a unicorn into existence as a referent. The referent of the referrer ‘unicorn’ is not real, meaning it does not exist insofar as there isn’t a thing you can point to in the world and say ‘this is what I mean’.”–Trent Fowler

    Knowledge(know,knowing) is a verb – an action – not a noun (thing). Knowledge exists as long as a living mind exists to hold it, or a record of knowledge exists that is reconstructable into knowledge (experience), just as running exists only while a person runs.

    Knowledge of a unicorn exists, and we label such knowledge a ‘concept’ which means some category or other of referrer. Knowledge of concepts exists, but concepts do not. Knowledge of unicorns exists, but unicorns do not.

    Horses exist.

    Dinosaurs did exist, but other than their descendants: reptiles and birds do not.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 12:54:00 UTC

  • It takes a great deal of Agency to speak truthfully; and learning to speak truth

    It takes a great deal of Agency to speak truthfully; and learning to speak truthfully provides you with Agency. Operational grammar of testimonial speech is as important as reading, mathematics, and logic.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 12:41:00 UTC

  • Reminder: I’m an anti-philosophy philosopher. I do science, economics, and law.

    Reminder: I’m an anti-philosophy philosopher. I do science, economics, and law. Everything else is fictionalism.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 11:23:00 UTC

  • “Where do you draw the line? Which are animals of pure determinism and which a m

    —“Where do you draw the line? Which are animals of pure determinism and which a men of will?”—Colin Everett

    Truthful speech.

    See?

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 11:22:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/991638958458236929

  • SERIES: Intelligible > imaginable(believable) > reasonable > rational > justific

    SERIES: Intelligible > imaginable(believable) > reasonable > rational > justificationary > logical > calculable > tautological.

    Still having a problem with justificationism.

    Rational choice (incentives) vs rationalism (justificationism/excuses)

    So far this is the best series I can come up with.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 09:51:00 UTC

  • “Where do you draw the line? Which are animals of pure determinism and which a m

    —“Where do you draw the line? Which are animals of pure determinism and which a men of will?”—Colin Everett

    Truthful speech.

    See?

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-02 07:21:00 UTC

  • SERIES: Imaginable > possible > reasonable > rational(ism), logical > tautologic

    SERIES: Imaginable > possible > reasonable > rational(ism), logical > tautological.

    Very common in english, which is a very technical language (analytic), we tend to pick terms that convey higher authority (persuasive ability) than our arguments support.

    So technically speaking most of the time we use ‘rational’ we mean reasonable, and when we use the term rational we mean argumentatively sound, and when we mean logical, we mean (very) internally consistent.

    So technically speaking when we use ‘rational choice’ we mean ‘reasonable choice’. The problem is ‘rational choice’ is embedded in the literature. We really don’t have a term for between reasonable (we can understand it), reasonable given the actor’s unseen incentives and values, and rational meaning argumentatively sound.

    Sometimes for clarity I’ll use reasonable vs rational choice, vs rational.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-01 20:19:00 UTC

  • The Weak Use Tools of The Weak

    THE WEAK USE TOOLS OF THE WEAK The problem with mythology, conflation and fictionalism is that like numerology astrology and scriptural interpretation, you can find any meaning you look for. Just as any opponent can do the same. As such it is just the wittiest liar that wins the tactical argument and the most utilitarian lies that win the war of political control. The only way for the good to win is the truth, and to abandon all convenient sophisms and to prosecute as liars all who do otherwise. Weak and false is weak and false no matter how useful weakness and falsehood are. THE WEAK USE TOOLS OF THE WEAK THE STRONG USE TRUTH , VIOLENCE, AND RULE

  • The Weak Use Tools of The Weak

    THE WEAK USE TOOLS OF THE WEAK The problem with mythology, conflation and fictionalism is that like numerology astrology and scriptural interpretation, you can find any meaning you look for. Just as any opponent can do the same. As such it is just the wittiest liar that wins the tactical argument and the most utilitarian lies that win the war of political control. The only way for the good to win is the truth, and to abandon all convenient sophisms and to prosecute as liars all who do otherwise. Weak and false is weak and false no matter how useful weakness and falsehood are. THE WEAK USE TOOLS OF THE WEAK THE STRONG USE TRUTH , VIOLENCE, AND RULE