I studied your diagrams, Henry. For myself and others I know personally, we do not like to be habitual recipients of charity, nor social parasites. We prefer to pay for goods even when we can get away with not paying , or stealing.
[quote=Skepdick post_id=483486 time=1607242585 user_id=17350]
[quote="henry quirk" post_id=483437 time=1607210087 user_id=472]
like I say, you (like advocate) miss the point
if you actually got it, you'd understand how dumb bringin' up free riders is
read the charts...apply them to yourself alone...see where [i]you[/i] actually stand...quit worryin' about the other guy for a sec
[/quote]
Harry. Your very own charts worry about the "other guy"!
Just because people have every intention and good will to pay for shit it doesn't mean that they actually do!
Let me draw you some pictures.
voluntary.png
vol1.png
[/quote]
I pointed out a few such logical inconsistencies early on but the answer was "that doesn't matter".
[quote="henry quirk" post_id=483540 time=1607267630 user_id=472]
oh yeah...now I remember...obvious as the crooked nose on my ugly mug why B gets it and you two don't
gonna have to note it in my book of useless, but interestin', observations
movin' on...
[/quote]
Is it because B is judging by intent rather than results? I don't get it, please explain. The purpose of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is actionable certainty. Actionable certainty requires replicable results. Any system which requires interpretation, like holy texts, literally cannot lead to replicable results that can be trusted because as soon as the interpreter changes, in either sense, the "meaning" of the interpreted work will also change, and this does not imply in a positive direction or that it will change in line or in time with society.
Those flowcharts have to be interpreted in a very specific way to get meaningful results, and that means intending for them to be meaningful before you even get started and ignoring any potential difficulties all the way through until you get your "answer".
Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 4:36 pm
The purpose of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is actionable certainty. Actionable certainty requires replicable results
Any system which requires interpretation, like holy texts, literally cannot lead to replicable results that can be trusted because as soon as the interpreter changes, in either sense, the "meaning" of the interpreted work will also change
EVERY result from EVERY system requires interpretation!
Assuming an interpretation-free system is possible is stupid idea that just won't die. Context-free/interpretation-free truths ignore the very mechanisms of language itself!
Science never tells you what to do - science tells you what happens.
Science will NEVER say "don't piss on the electric fence".
Science wil ALWAYS say "urine is a great conductor of electricity".
How you act upon that information depends entirely on you.
[quote=Skepdick post_id=483548 time=1607269300 user_id=17350]
[quote=Advocate post_id=483547 time=1607269015 user_id=15238]
The purpose of all knowledge, wisdom, and understanding is actionable certainty. Actionable certainty requires replicable results
Any system which requires interpretation, like holy texts, literally cannot lead to replicable results that can be trusted because as soon as the interpreter changes, in either sense, the "meaning" of the interpreted work will also change
[/quote]
EVERY result from EVERY system requires interpretation!
Assuming an interpretation-free system is possible is stupid idea that just won't die. Context-free/interpretation-free truths ignore the very mechanisms of language itself!
Science never tells you what to do - science tells you what happens.
Science will NEVER say "don't piss on the electric fence".
Science wil ALWAYS say "urine is a great conductor of electricity".
How you act upon that information depends entirely on you.
[/quote]
Yes, every result requires interpretation, which is why those systems which require Less interpretation are Better.
Advocate wrote: ↑Sun Dec 06, 2020 4:45 pm
Yes, every result requires interpretation, which is why those systems which require Less interpretation are Better.
What's your yard stick for measuring how much interpretation a system requires?
