( … )

Enriques…. (???) the enlightenment gap.  closing the enlightenment gap with the physical sciences. Unifying the sciences. There is no system of measurement that allows us to measure intersubjective differences.

now that we’ve unified to the logics and the physical sciences, we can unify the logical, physical and behavioral sciences – human nature.

Why Produce The List of First Causes?

The human mind reverts to intuition (generalization and abstraction) whenever our knowledge is insufficient for disambiguation into analyzable dimensions. Worse, just as we take time to learn to speak in longer and longer sentences, we overload, intuition, overload reason (ideals), therefore need for calculation (measurements)

So in our study of First Causes we are repeating the process of disambiguation within the sciences now that we have finished with logics and language.

So our job is to Disambiguate, List, and Test causal dimensions – To Produce a system of measurement and it’s measures. An exhaustive list we can walk through and incrementally test questions, propositions, statements, and arguments (and deceits). This list allows us Falsify or at least open to analysis those claims. So that we can decide the reciprocity (and truth) of questions, propositions, statements, arguments at increasing scales of complexity.
So that we can compose constitutions and laws that prevent war, fraud, deceit – as well as ignorance, error, bias, and deceit. So that we can end the present war on civilization.

So the purpose of each section that follows is to produce a set of dimensions that explain the behavior of human beings (any sentient creature), so that we can use a checklist to analyze (measure) complex behavior, by breaking it into its causal dimensions, and thereby explaining all substantive human behavior.

In other words, we’re producing a software specification for man. With that software specification we can ‘code’ mankind with the law – truthfully, even if not always optimally. Meaning that it is possible to produce

High Failure Rate of Previous Attempts

Note that everyone who has tried this exercise from Bentham to the present has failed. Both Anglo and French models attempted to codify. But they did so after the replacement of landed economies with commercial economies, and the seizure of political power using gunpowder, and expansion of commercial and political power using sail. Thus the enlightenment was a false promise, just as Christianity-Islam, and Marxism-Socialism, and PC-Woke are false promises.

Of those that have failed, most have tried to destroy our law, and rule of law, and to follow other civilizations into command – because they failed to produce a science of law.
Europeans, particularly the English, have produced a scientific law, because their ancient culture began with a law of equals between the warrior caste, that other castes sought to work their way into. This equality prohibited authority, providing only decidability, and as such produced empirical law – the science of cooperation.

In the present age those unfit for that law of equals seek to restore various versions of servitude in order to restore a political order in which they are fit. The problem is that this is a monopoly of slaves, serfs, peasants – rather than the previous hierarchy of responsibility and care.

Discover First Causes (First Principles)

Discovery of first causes, at every state of equilibrium (CD: explain natural hierarchy of logics, grammars).  By continuous disambiguation to realism and naturalism (physics, entropy). By exhaustive, adversarial competition (analysis, deconstruction, falsification)
And reconstruction of the formal, physical, behavioral, and evolutionary sciences. Using a Single, Ultimately Parsimonious, Value neutral, Paradigm, Logic, vocabulary, and grammar
Providing commensurability across all human display word and deed. That permits adversarial falsification of the accumulated error, bias, and deceit in all disciplines. Primarily in law, where it is most consequential. Ending the long history of lying in public, to the public, in matters public.

Most people seek utility without first exhausting first causes and constructing the truth then asking what can be done within that framework.

The Trouble with First Causes and Principles

Intuition is hard to trade for reason, making reduction counter-intuitive
Domain Knowledge is required to discover first principles.
Rebuilding understanding from first principles is … work.
Using understanding (developing an intuition) from first principles requires habituation (practice) – just like say math or programming.
Intuition doesn’t require a series of logical steps, but first principles do.
Intellectually Dishonest people (intentionally or not) won’t follow you across steps b/c they value their moral intuition like fundamentalists. (an important human insight into the severity of the problem of politics)
People will admit math or physical science is hard, but (almost) never admit that they are ignorant, appealing to intuition, and uninformed in behavioral sciences, especially morality and politics.
Everyone presumes they’re competent in truth, ethics, and morality – when they’re just (largely) unconscious bots. (Esp. among Feels vs Reals )
Only after practicing P are you aware of how unconscious we are.
Only after that awareness … are you fully conscious. (Cognitive Agency)
What we hope to do is produce the ‘specification’ for truthful speech, reciprocal action, good, government, and moral policy – so that we discuss policy that is practical rather than theory which is overwhelming.

Use The Adversarial Method To produce an internally consistent, externally correspondent, operationally necessary, hierarchy of first principles

Everything starts with physics and entropy 😉
We disambiguate any claim until it is dependent on the stable equilibrium of first causes (first principles)
For example, ‘symmetries’ in mathematics, the standard model in physics, the periodic table of the elements, the biochemical compounds, and so on.
Explaining this process in detail is beyond the scope of this introductory presentation but in the courseware, we work from the bottom up producing a continuous consistent logic of the formal, physical, cognitive, behavioral, social, political, economic, group strategic, and evolutionary domains.

A few slides later in this presentation we’ll show you the basics of the first principles for every discipline and how we describe the logic of each discipline as a ‘grammar’.