A Foundation of Nonsense

Guest Post by The Zman

Math and science are built upon axioms. Very simply, an axiom is something that is always true and assumed to be true. An example is the reflexive property in algebra. A number is always equal to itself. Axioms are the building blocks, from which new truths are discovered. A proof is an inferential argument for a mathematical statement, using other previously established statements. That means a proof can be traced back to the original, assumed truths, those axioms that are the foundation of mathematics.

-----------------------------------------------------
It is my sincere desire to provide readers of this site with the best unbiased information available, and a forum where it can be discussed openly, as our Founders intended. But it is not easy nor inexpensive to do so, especially when those who wish to prevent us from making the truth known, attack us without mercy on all fronts on a daily basis. So each time you visit the site, I would ask that you consider the value that you receive and have received from The Burning Platform and the community of which you are a vital part. I can't do it all alone, and I need your help and support to keep it alive. Please consider contributing an amount commensurate to the value that you receive from this site and community, or even by becoming a sustaining supporter through periodic contributions. [Burning Platform LLC - PO Box 1520 Kulpsville, PA 19443] or Paypal

-----------------------------------------------------
To donate via Stripe, click here.
-----------------------------------------------------
Use promo code ILMF2, and save up to 66% on all MyPillow purchases. (The Burning Platform benefits when you use this promo code.)

This is how we accumulate knowledge about the physical world over generations. The proofs based on those building blocks are eventually incorporated into the building blocks of math. The theorems and proofs multiply, slowly building up the stock of things that are known to be true. Calculus was built upon algebra and physics was built upon calculus and so on. It why a student can quickly go from zero to trying to discover new truths about the world. They inherit a supply of things assumed to be true.

This accretive process of increasing our stock of knowledge is not limited to math and science. It is the way human societies evolve over time. We start with basic truths about the human condition and the realities we face as a society. Over time we acquire new knowledge, by building on what we know or that which we think we know. For example, Libertarians rely on the concept of homo economicus. This asserts that humans are consistently rational and self-interested agents pursuing their ends optimally.

In theory, at least, this is the basis of democracy. One side builds a set of policies and proposals, allegedly based on the assumed truths. The other side does the same thing arriving at different policies. After a vigorous examination of the competing claims, a consensus is formed around one solution. If it works out, then that becomes part of society’s truths, from which new problems will be addressed in the future. That’s not really how it works, but people believe it. It is axiomatic that democracy works this way.

What we know to be western liberal democracy, assumes certain things about humanity to be true all the time. The blank slate is the most obvious example. Everything about our politics and culture assumes that humans are infinitely malleable. From school policy to prison reform, public policy is based on the assumption that people can be whatever they choose, because they have free will and a blank slate that can be erased and re-illustrated at any point in their life. You are what you make of yourself.

It’s how our rulers arrived at the idea of importing millions of foreigners. Those foreigners can be re-purposed into tax paying westerners, through education and enculturation, to pay the pensions of the native stock. Those Somali goatherds can be plopped down into Minnesota and over time, develop all of the habits of the average Minnesotan, just by emulation and proximity. Race laws are all based on the assumption that you can train people to stop noticing racial difference and therefore, end racism.

Of course, science is putting the lie to the blank slate. Genetics is everyday filling out the truth of the human condition, which is that we are the result of our coding. The thousands of mating decisions, made by those who came before us, are what make us what we are as people. Everything from our height to our sense of humor is baked into our DNA. Our health outcomes and our life outcomes are the results of that coding. Not surprisingly, the closer our coding is to others, the greater the similarities.

While no one is prepared to say free will is a lie, at least not publicly, no serious person accepts that we are infinitely malleable. The argument that you can change your personality is as nutty as saying you can make yourself taller or younger. This reality used to be a building block of Western thought, but was “discredited” by the blank slate theorists, but it is now being reestablished by genetics. In other words, one of the main building blocks of modern social democracy is about to crumble.

That’s a big one, but it is not the only one. Both Freudian and Jungian psychology still cast a very long shadow over western culture. Freud is no longer taken seriously, outside of his historical importance. The idea that your emotional state is the product of childhood sexual trauma is a click less realistic than phrenology. Jungian psychotherapy is also being overrun by neuroscience. Few people still think they can talked out of their madness anymore. Instead, pharmaceuticals are used to treat diseases of the brain.

It’s not just the quackery. The moral philosophy that underlies our political philosophy is similarly built on a foundation of nonsense. The Enlightenment thinkers all started by considering man’s natural state. It was either a harmonious communal existence or a brutal war like existence. From both starting points, they worked forward to build a model how man went from the state of nature to what was then civilization. The resulting moral philosophy is the basis of our political and legal philosophy today.

Property rights, the rule of law, the relationship of man and state, these are all based on those assumptions about man’s natural state. Libertarians and so-called Conservatives take the Lockean position that society is built upon the social contract. Those on the Left assume Hobbes was right and order must be imposed on society. Marxists further accept the materialist claims about the nature of man. All of the iterations and flavors of political ideology are rooted in one of those two broad assumptions about humanity.

Those assumptions are all wrong. We know that much now. Better archaeology and anthropology is helping illuminate the pre-history mankind. Evolutionary biology is also helping explain the fossil and archaeological record. Genetics, of course, are re-writing the map of mankind, explaining how we spread across the globe. What we are finding out is that man, in his “natural state” was not what Hobbes imagined nor what Locke imagined. Man’s “natural” state is much more complicated and much more local.

The implication should be obvious. Like psychology, as the underlying assumptions give way to new knowledge, the conclusions built on those axioms must give way as well. If tomorrow we learn that two plus two is not always four, everything we know about the world stops making sense. If everything we thought we knew about humankind and human civilization turns out to be wrong, we suddenly don’t know a whole lot about how we should organize ourselves, other than the old rules are probably not going to work.

It seems today that Western societies are painfully re-learning things that were common knowledge a few generations ago. The old axiom, fences make good neighbors, was replaced with “diversity is our strength.” Every time a swarthy fellow blows up in the public square, we inch a bit closer to the realization that diversity is a nightmare. That’s the part we see. The part we don’t see, at least not yet, is the crumbling of the foundation stones of the modern West. That foundation of nonsense is giving way to biological reality

Subscribe
Notify of
guest
25 Comments
kokoda - AZEK (Deck Boards) doesn't stand behind its product
kokoda - AZEK (Deck Boards) doesn't stand behind its product
November 1, 2017 7:25 pm

Well, you certainly are optimistic. IMO, there are too many human sheep that follow the political leaders (such as they are). Thus, I don’t expect to see crumbling stones of the West based on re-learning the old truths. When we crumble, it will be like a hammer to a nail.

Just a thought – what does anyone think of the next Dem choice of candidates for President? How about Hank Johnson and Maxine Waters to inspire the intellectual appetites.

Stucky
Stucky

“How about Hank Johnson and Maxine Waters to inspire the intellectual appetites.”

Sure.

Random islands around the world would sink while crying out “RAYYCISS!!*.

i forget
i forget
November 1, 2017 7:58 pm

In Fyodor Dostoyevsky’s Notes from Underground (published in 1864), the protagonist implicitly supports the idea of two times two making five, spending several paragraphs considering the implications of rejecting the statement “two times two makes four.” His purpose is not ideological, however. Instead, he proposes that it is the free will to choose or reject the logical as well as the illogical that makes mankind human. He adds: “I admit that twice two makes four is an excellent thing, but if we are to give everything its due, twice two makes five is sometimes a very charming thing too.”[citation needed]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2_%2B_2_%3D_5

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
  i forget
November 2, 2017 12:27 am

The underground man is nuts. Even so, he makes more sense than K-Suzie.

i forget
i forget
  EL Coyote
November 2, 2017 1:24 pm

Even free spirits are bounded, have limitations, & often can’t help but telegraph them. Only human, after all. Not gods, despite all projection\compulsion to the contrary.

One free spirit who ushered in quite a bit of unboundedness to 2+2 drew the line at dice – god don’t play. When the subatomic, decidedly something other than Newtonian, foundations are some kind of 3d (or however many d’s it turns out to be, if it ever turns out to be) craps table, & that turns out to be beyond the comfort zone line, well, that’s a mirror, not a necessary.

Language is metaphor. Math, too, is a language.

Desires, let alone compulsions, for solidity, & linearity, nature is indifferent to that bounded nature of some of its denizens. Poetry is, or can be, indifferent to that, too. And I’ll take a Dostoyevsky needle over a Keyser Söze haystack\balloon every time.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WapiPUogZgY

BB
BB
November 1, 2017 8:26 pm

This idiot doesn’t seem to realize his baisc assumptions are all wrong .One of those foundations is evolutionary biology which has holes big enough to drive a thousand Mack Trucks through.This shit just never ends.

Damn Stucky ,do something to save us!!!!

RHS Jr
RHS Jr
  BB
November 1, 2017 9:41 pm

BB, Evolutionary Biology Science’s foundation is Chemistry which has no holes. Non-scientist Useful Idiots spout theories that can give anything a bad name like Gore has done to Climate Science and Democrats have done to Democratic. Darwin was brilliant in his day as a Scientist just as Jesus was in Religion but fanatics bend both men’s words 180 degrees. Given a little more time, any Evolutionary Theory holes will be closed one way or the other just as the Flat Earth and Earth Centered Universe Theories are closed.

Maggie
Maggie
November 1, 2017 9:43 pm

Here, let me revise this:

Why Fundamental Laws are not so much Fun, but Mental now.

Math and science are probably next on the list to be called racist. Z-man may very well be responsible for the collapse of the modern scientific world when the dozens of academicians reading this blog realize that the principles upon which mathematics stands are principles of equality. Yes, Z, that’s right. Obviously math is racist.

You claimed a number to always be equal to itself. Well, what if that number was written in Roman form and refused to grasp that Zero exists, meaning that the Roman TEN and the Arabic TEN are actually NOT equal at all, all things considered. Because in this modern day we know that there are always things we are not considering. You discuss proofs and truths as if those are evidentiary of fact when we continually hear facts are subjective assessments of reality made by those in control. When you say “a proof can be traced back to the original, assumed truths,” you admit the subjective aspect of proof relies upon an original assumption. Some foundations are less equal than others.

Accumulating knowledge in THIS physical world requires vetting for political correctness. Scrutinize the knowledge held about the physical world and you will discover that most of it was determined by white men and, therefore, is suspect. Mentioning building blocks as a precursor to theorems, as if generally accepted truths from your white racist mathematicians who designed the blocks without any regard for the lack of Zero to Nero were an obvious stepping stone to Theorems is the real reason black people can’t do well at math. Africa has a rich assortment of numerical systems: Doubling, similar to a binary counting, i.e., 1.11.111.1111 and so on, but in words not symbols. When symbolizing numbers Africans seemed to prefer base 5, 12 or 20 rather than base ten. Therefore, being forced into slavery without a conversion chart severely hampered their ability to think in decimal. By now, you must realize that your stock in things known to be true is as conflated as your believe that mathematical facts are not subjective.

I will just ignore the ignorance you spew about calculus and algebra, since you refer to zero and we already discussed the history (or lack of it) of zero. Not all students inherit the wealth of science as you propose, only the privileged few from wealthy Western societies trained to accept and propagate assumptions of equality are able to enjoy the inheritance stolen from the less privileged class.

Instead of accretion, the less privileged store of knowledge is depleted or negated in ways that have never been measured. while “privileged” human societies evolve over time in the way you describe, perhaps, those born in human conditions where reality is counted on both fingers and toes or with arms or legs or even, with a dozen of something perhaps your narrow mind cannot conceive (duodecimal was common in Nigeria and a few other areas of Africa and Egypt). You say, and I quote: “We start with basic truths about the human condition and the realities we face as a society. Over time we acquire new knowledge, by building on what we know or that which we think we know.” Since we already realize you are discriminating against twelve-fingered African or Egyptian humans, I will completely disregard your attempt to impose rational theory into an imperfectly formed argument about the value of math and science. While all humans, even those counting on a dozen fingers, may be self-interested agents, it is grossly presumptuous to jump to yet another assumption: that white axioms are the basis of democracy.

You describe a democratic process where a consensus is formed. Then, immediately, you admit it is flawed. “That’s not really how it works, but people believe it. It is axiomatic that democracy works this way.” It is apparent from the assumptive leap made from “not really how it works” to accepting an axiomatic truth which obviously does not exist.

Western liberal democracy pretends (italics needed) certain things about humanity to be true all the time. While there is definite manipulation constantly imposed upon all humans by the privileged and powerful, it is NOT true that all of humanity can be changed for the better. You claim there is a widespread believe in free will and that any of us can make of ourselves what we wish to make. Then you make the most laughable jump of all: Millions of foreigners were not imported to be tax payers, but to be slaves to the machine.

At this point, I’ve grown tired of my little game of turning your essay into a REAL Nonsensical Foundation. It is a game I used to play with my professors at OU. I would go to the library and find one of their old Theses or Published articles on the assigned topic. Then, as an exercise, I would reword, revise and rearrange their thoughts in ways that argued against their premise and turn it in to see if they actually read a damn thing anyone wrote. Usually, there would be a couple of comments along the side “Good point” or “Elaborate here” but except for one paper in Economics, I always got high marks.

Foundations of Nonsense indeed.

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Maggie
November 2, 2017 9:42 am
Maggie
Maggie
November 1, 2017 9:57 pm

I see the errors, but since I am no longer on the PC, I am ignoring them. It was all in fun, anyway, Zman. You make good points, but I hope you see that in the world of things made to be what they were never meant to be, the idea that there being usefulness in believing something’s numerical value can be trusted is not one to flaunt to the world.

Once upon a time, there was a Wide Mouth Frog who lost his mother and was hungry. He hopped from animal to animal and asked each what it was they ate. Worms said the bird. Nuts and berries said the squirrel. Grass and leaves said the deer.

Finally, the Wide Mouth Frog spotted an alligator who told him he really like to eat Wide Mouth Frogs. Pursing his lips into a tiny little “o”, the frog said “never mind” and walked away as quickly as he could without any hops at all.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
  Maggie
November 1, 2017 9:59 pm

Maggie, that joke was originally about how to tell the women who had big vaginas. Your modification is horrible.

Seriously, where is the punch line? You and YoBo need to take HSF’s seminar on funny.

Maggie
Maggie
  EL Coyote
November 1, 2017 10:05 pm

It is difficult to tell the joke in written words. I learned this joke from a SMSgt in NATO AWACS. He never said anything about vaginas. If he had, I would have reported him for being sexist. LOL… now that’s funny.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
  Maggie
November 2, 2017 12:20 am

Now I wonder if you really got the original version of the joke that ends with:
“help me find my truck and we’ll drive out of here.”
Or:
“now clap. See?, tight.”
Yep, guys are sworn to secrecy concerning our joke heritage.

Maggie
Maggie
  Maggie
November 2, 2017 7:11 am

Wide Mouth Frogs! So he purses his.mouth in a tiny “o” and says “never mind”
Who doesn’t get that?

BL
BL
  EL Coyote
November 2, 2017 12:41 am

EC- The only big vagina jokes I heard were something about tying a board to your ass and using a flashlight to find your car keys. Maybe a few more but not something you would post.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
  BL
November 2, 2017 12:53 am

I never heard that version but the one I heard in high school, the guy fell in, then he finds another guy in there, the guy says help me find my flashlight so we can look for my truck.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
November 1, 2017 9:57 pm

I thought this was going to be about KeisterSuzie.

Maggie
Maggie
  EL Coyote
November 1, 2017 10:07 pm

Mary Christine is fishing in the Gulf of Mexico and asked me to hold off on the story about me and Susie.

EL Coyote
EL Coyote
November 2, 2017 12:38 am

I skimmed this article, you know why? It’s light. There is nothing new. Even when he starts off with math, he fails to credit the Babylonians, Egyptians, Arabs and Greeks. Instead, he conflates that with the incremental discoveries in science and makes it sound as if western man discovered everything. So that initial dishonesty sounds like a YoBo piece of propaganda. Indeed, he becomes a shrill agitator for the wall.

This nonsense article is not a total waste, the article is right up YoBo’s alley. Hear that YoBo? It’s up yours.

Maggie
Maggie
  EL Coyote
November 2, 2017 8:23 am

Did you read my satire or did you only “hop” onto critique my Wide Mouth Frog joke?

By the way, I heard and actually used to tell the “help me look for my car keys and we will drive out of this swamp” joke and it was NOTHING like the Wide Mouth Frog.

A Foundation of Nonsense

Anonymous
Anonymous
  Maggie
November 2, 2017 9:55 am

Ok, you prove my point, your so-called dirty jokes are cleaned up versions of the original jokes handed down through generations guy to guy since the days of the Babylonians. Some well-meaning Master Sergeant explained the joke after you heard it and said, ‘I don’t get it’. He had to go real slow and change the situation to a swamp. They were going to drive out of a swamp, get it? Ha ha.

The reason men laugh at most jokes is they are either very funny or very stupid. With women, you have to hit them with a 2X4 before they will laugh, they don’t ‘get’ dumb jokes. This is one reason I suspect YoBo is not a real man. He is either a robot or worse, a woman.

c1ue
c1ue
November 2, 2017 1:26 am

Meh.
Particularly the bit about Homo Economicus. That part is a Big Lie, officially disproven over and over again by real world experiments.
Real people aren’t at all logical about economics even when they have sufficient information.

Dan
Dan
November 2, 2017 7:24 am

Heh, corner a SJW that says they believe in evolution by demanding they explain how “diversity” and “equality” square w/evolutionary biology…. dont let them squirm away, always throw the “articles of faith” for each false ideology that they have learned to parrot right back at them watch the cognitive dissonance do its thing. Beautiful.

Iconoclast421
Iconoclast421
November 2, 2017 3:22 pm

You can change your personality. I went from INTJ to INTP and even INFP by dating an ENTP.

i forget
i forget
  Iconoclast421
November 2, 2017 3:31 pm

Hmmm…are pussanality & personality synonymous? It is just a ride, but when you gaze long into a ride, the ride also gazes into you? Nietzsche, right?