[T]he value of philosophy is to convert what we learn, into the web (network) of related concepts that we currently USE. (Note that I do not use the word ‘believe’, which is a synonym for justification.) This often requires a great deal of rearranging of our concepts. That which was before subordinate, turns out to be superordinate. That which before was moral, turns out to be immoral. Trusted truths become harmful fallacies.
Look at the scope of what I am trying to do:
1) Western philosophy is the history of attempting to speak the truth, truthfully.
2) Science and mathematics discovered the means of speaking truthfully.
3) The scientific and mathematical methods however, did not include costs.
4) By integrating costs into the scientific method, that method evolves into the universal means by which humans can endeavor to speak truthfully – regardless of discipline.
5) Thus fulfilling the 2500 year old attempt to speak truthfully – even if we are forever bidden from knowing whether or now we are speaking the ultimate, most parsimonious truth that is possible.
6) With this knowledge we can then embody in law, the principle of truth telling. And under universal standing, and rule of law, and property-en-toto, require truthful speech whenever costs are involved in one’s utterances: ethics and politics.
If you can find more noble an ambition then I would like to know it.
If you can find a better argument then I would like to know it.
But I am fairly sure that I stand on the shoulders of many who came before me and the destination of their vision is pretty obvious from this height.
The Philosophy of Aristocracy
The Propertarian Institute