The New Man Epistemology

The New Man

Epistemology

In order to build a new society, we have to have educated and reasonable people who are on the same page epistemologically.  Not a buncha religions and people pushing their stupid convictions on others.  We have put up with it too long.  It’s time for people to grow up and stop sucking their thumb with these stupid belief systems.  It’s causing too much harm.

The first principle of our epistemology is skepticism.  Therefore, we use this epistemology because we are testing it and experimenting to see if it will work better than previous systems.  We reserve the right to fall back on older systems.  Skepticism means that you never have the whole picture, you never think you are absolutely right, or that anyone else is.  You judge information according to usefulness, truth value, and other values, but never as absolutely right.  Even physics equations are just provisional info that we will use, until we have better info.  At no point do we believe it.  We use strategies to deal with uncertainty, rather than attempting or claiming absolute certainty.

Information resolution

We look at information as a hierachy of low resolution to high resolution systems and then the info in those systems have high and low resolution.  The higher the resolution, the higher the truth value.  Therefore, when someone claims for example that the Bible is the absolute truth, that is rather silly because human language has pretty low resolution.  That’s like a child saying, “my brother is absolutely a doo doohead”.  Doodoo head is too low resolution a concept to be called true and certainly not absolutely true.  The hierachy of info goes something like this.  It needs to be understood also that our perspective cannot be divorced from the concepts we make about these system, so even the putting together of the system itself if tainted by our perspective.  We can never see the thing in itself because if you can’t see, you can’t understand anything.
High resolution
Physics

Chemistry

Biology

Human language, humanities

Low resolution

Theory of Everything?  Algorithm, heuristic Web of Everything

We have a goal of integrating these systems, creating a computerized algorithmic theory of everything that is not a theory really, but a web of loose connections.  For example, “love” is low resolution, we connect it with oxytocin, oxytocin is connected with carbon.  Therefore carbon is connected to love.  And the computer program will then be able to find connections we never could and produce novel solutions.

Then you have the epistemology and senses you use to understand these systems.  E=MC2 is piece of language, a concept.  So is ‘doodoo head’.  Which has the higher truth value?  Neither is the absolute truth but they refer to things.  If her brother is behaving badly, is she speaking the absolute truth by calling him a doodoo head.  Come on people, this is basic.

The second principle is anti-logocentrism.  Language does not perfectly describe the universe.  Nor do numbers.  They are just tools that we use to get work done.  See Wittgenstein, Jerome Bruner.  For example, to many people a choice is a very real thing, but in essence, it’s just a word that describes a group of very different experiences.  Choosing what to eat cuz you’re hungry is not very similar to choosing a wife in a dream state.  Different drives, different circumstances.  They just have something quite small in common so we use a word like choice and now we think we’ve got magical powers called free will.  WE do an analysis of the language people use to see what concepts, algorithms, heuristics, assumptions are beneath their use of language. 

For an example, If someone says in a philosophy group, “How many years does it take to reach enlightenment?”

What are the assumptions behind that?

Language literalism - He thinks enlightenment is something very real and defined, when it’s not.

Personhood literalism - He thinks a person is a special thing to the universe.  In fact a person is a piece of the earth’s upper crust that comes and goes.  That we give it a name doesn’t change the fact.  When a person is dead, they are literally no body, it’s somewhat delusional that we even speak of a dead person.  That’s over for good.  There’s no heaven, no resurrection, most likely, because a piece of earth crust isn’t important enough for any powerful being to recreate.  All they did was eat and poop the first time around, no need to bring them back.  Plus there’s a billion just like them still eating and pooping.

So, we look at the basic, underlying assumptions, if we have to engage such a person but we generally avoid talking to those who are ignorant and not interested in learning.

WE do not believe in free will, we do not disbelieve in freewill.  Like doodoo head, its too childish a concept to do what people want it to do.  But we still use intentional language (choice, belief, desire, free will) just for communication.  Most likely all we experience, all that happens is determined, and if not, then indeterminate, or something else.  It is most likely not caused by our beliefs and desires or will power.  It is surprising that people take these things so literally.  Literalism is stupidity.  With any concept, we should ask, what does that concept do?  How did the concept come about?

Our epistemology assumes that what we experience is not the ‘real world’, or the ‘thing-in-itself’.  As we interact with things, what we are and what the object is determines how we experience it.  It’s possible also that all matter, all physical properties are the same as experience and that when many particles work together, such as in a human body, they can produce unitary properties, therefore unitary experiences.  An example is a magnet.  When metal has domains which are not in alignment, it is just a piece of metal.  Put those domains in alignment, it becomes a magnet.  The whole metal now reacts to an opposing force.  A human is similar, our cells work together to make us a singular being.  It is also connected through electromagnetism, in fact we might just be a giant, complex magnet, or electromagnetic phenomenon.  A computer is of course the same thing.  Your computer just might already have quite a complex type of experience.

A magnet is probably having a very basic experience, and experience could be based on electromagnetism since that speed might be what creates a human type of experience.

We do not use the algorithm of belief

We don’t believe in gods or any kinds of myths.  We have no need also to deny them.  We only use the term belief because we inherited it.  But it is unreasonable to claim to know something for sure when you don’t know it for sure and that’s what belief is.  We’ve no use for it, except to communicate with others who believe in it or use it.

We do not believe in IQ or any similar constructs.  It’s just a tool of discrimination.

Our goal is to create a new man who is peaceful, powerful, and intelligent to fight the degeneration which we see happening.  But we want to do this only among ourselves, not the society at large.  We have to insulate ourselves from the idiocy of society.

With this as a goal, we may try many things which may helps such as eugenic breeding among ourselves for traits like happy demeanor and intelligence.  We want to do this only by normal means rather than genetic engineering until gene engineering is made safe.

We do not believe such things as marriage are anything but a convenience.  We try to keep options open and we champion freedom and options in all things.  We only let those in who understand and accept our epistemology and goals of freedom, beauty, intelligence.

Concepts

Concepts are algorithms, heuristics, little computer programs in the brain.  They are not something ultimately real in the universe.  For example, ‘love’ is not a thing.  It is a word that refers us to some feelings we have had, there are a limited number of humans and a limited number of people who have or will feel that way.  It’s not something that’s all over the universe.  Other animals may have no such experience they would describe that way or even we may have not experienced things that way in the past or will in the future.

Perceptual Psychology, Phenomenology

We try to deduce from a person’s behavior, what they are experiencing.  For example, if a child runs away from grandma, we understand that she saw a scary face, even though we only see grandma.  

Moral stance

We only use a moral judgement to change behavior, we don’t believe it is something real.  Blame, responsibility, these things do not well describe what we know physically or even what we experience.  They are just algorithms which have been successful.  Therefore, we don’t believe people are in full control of themselves and are worthy of absolute blame.  We blame only to identify the source of the problem, then we need to calm down to find a way to fix the problem.  We don’t get stuck in morality loops.

Once a person has the right epistemology, we need then a general education and then a specialty education.

The general education should cover extensively fields which increase personal happiness, health, and success.  There’s isn’t time to waste on trifles, we want info the person can use.  We focus then on information literacy, technology, health, and happiness.  We want every single person to be able to learn expert:

Philosophy

Computers

Mechanics

Biology

Health - Biohacking

Physics

Programming

Must be expert at reading comprehension and quickly accessing and using information with computers, calculators.  Stuff like Beowulf, learn that in your own time if you want, it’s not for basic school.  There is a hierarchy.  A person who doesn’t know how to stay healthy doesn’t need to be learning Beowulf yet, there are more important things for them.

It is our goal to start a school that teaches only applied ways of using all of these.  We learn nothing in school which cannot be used by a single person to complete an important task.

Nassim taleb has a good list of heurstics in his work.  We want to collect algorithms, heuristics.  Also computerize some of them, see what AI can do with them.  Also, we learn to deconstruct the algorithms and heuristics that others are using.  It provides predictive value.  It mostly predicts what they will say however, not what they will do because they don’t do what they say.

Here we can start a list:

1. Nothing goes as planned.  All intelligent people know this, but most people don’t.  They make plans and deadlines.  They say things like “I always keep my promises.”  That’s a delusional person.

Some associated theorists to our viewpoint include:

Nassim Taleb

Jerome Bruner - Show you how language, stories work

Immanuel Kant - epistemology, thing in itself is not knowable

Paul Feyerbrand

Mathematics without numbers: Geofrey hellman - this helps break the spell of those who think numbers compose the universe

Wittgenstein - shows us how language games work, language doesn’t describe experience or reality, they just do a job

Game Theory

Goals:

1. Start a school with does real education for every single member of US.  Kids and adults will learn all of these things.  Few people have received an effective education, even those with a Phd.  Nor have I.  We are starting over.  I’ve learned just enough to start over and learn the right things.
2. Start businesses for US.
3. Start a group of like minded persons.  Allow access to those interested.  Let no one in who does not understand or follow the epistemology.  Not even our own children.  If they don’t understand it, they are not useful to this movement.  They can be on the outskirts, perhaps have a lower status, but they can live a full life without using our epistemology.  There is no negative view of people who disagree, we just don’t need them on the inside of the movement.