CTMU and Q1234

Based on Langan's CTMU> Cognitive Theoretical Model of the Universe>

thus this debate follows.

A most amusing and interesting one.

And the one underneath that one is a series of thoughtful questions from another thinker.

To nay-sayers of online social networks, the below 2 discussions are proof of Facebook being useful for a lot more than "I just ate a sandwich, and it was, good."


:



Mars Turner If you were to create a government founded on the belief of the CTMU what would it look like? I created a group called "Republic of ecclesiastical Dukes" to express that thought. Maybe you might have some input on the idea.
May 11 at 8:58am · Comment · Like · See Wall-to-Wall

Mars Turner That is why in the Republic of ecclesiastical Dukes, the ones who understand the CTMU are called "Dukes", the rest are subjects, the goal is to create as many Dukes as possible.
May 12 at 8:29pm

Adam Robert Haas My short answer to your original question, Mars, is it depends. To be more specific, it would depend on generalized utility (GU), which in turn depends upon the specifics of the current environment at large. Admittedly, that's still pretty damn nonspecific.

The best answer I can come up with at this moment is that it would place an emphasis on finding and exposing truth so that the citizenry could make TRUTHFULLY informed decisions. This requires scientists and solid thinkers of all sorts to be recognized as authorities on truth more so than the typical present-day politician. Perhaps, a hierarchically structured system of peer rating would help the otherwise defenseless masses to discriminate honest and able thinkers from the inept and the dishonest. Positions of political leadership ought to be financially comfortable, but NOT cushy. Unfortunately, the political process, at least here in America, currently tends to favor selfish-not-so-smart-weasel types. Can I get off this damn soapbox now, please? ;)
May 18 at 3:13am

Mars Turner haha, the solution for excluding the selfish-not-so-smart-weasel types, is to not pay the ecclesiastical Dukes! and further, that all funding of an ecclesiastical duchy be procured through the Dukes own innovative contributions in technology
May 19 at 7:32am

Hamid Javanbakht "the ones who understand the CTMU are called "Dukes", the rest are subjects"

lol, perhaps it's not a question of who are the first to understand it, rather who are the first to make it mainstream.
May 22 at 10:51pm

Mars Turner having an ignorant mob swayed to believe some dogma won't make them fit to handle issues of government
May 22 at 10:53pm

Hamid Javanbakht By "mainstream" I'm refering to publishing something reputable in an academic journal, which is one of its greatest weaknesses, it has been blacklisted due to its support for the fringe "intelligent design" movement.
May 22 at 11:07pm

Mars Turner "publishing... reputable... academic journal" is all foder for the ignorant mob, where people will accept it purely because it's printed in such a way... I hope it never gets published as such, because it would only give credence to those stupid journals, only further encouraging people to not use their own brain.
May 22 at 11:15pm

Hamid Javanbakht "The peer review process encourages authors to meet the accepted standards of their discipline and prevents the dissemination of irrelevant findings, unwarranted claims, unacceptable interpretations, and personal views. Publications that have not undergone peer review are likely to be regarded with suspicion by scholars and professionals."

It's necessary to have some forum for the exchange and debate of ideas among one's peers.
May 23 at 12:38am

Mars Turner I encourage open public debate on ideas. But finding one's "peers" in a journal is unlikely when it comes to highly advanced ideas.
May 23 at 7:55am

Hamid Javanbakht That is one reason he started publishing his ideas in "High-IQ Journals" and started the Mega Foundation..."super-geniuses" do have peers, they're called High-IQ societies, although often times they attract people looking for validation or some kind of hobby. So far Langan has been trying to "decompress" his theory to make it decipherable to general intellectual audiences...in contrast journals are usually read by those scholars with a deep grasp of the technical aspects of a subject, in the case of the CTMU, it has been published in more interdisciplinary settings (I.D.) than technical (Philosophical of Mind, Cognitive Science, Computational Linguistics, Metaphysical Logic, Category Theory, etc), subjects...which the "profane masses" usually haven't studied in depth...Chris has actually been very generous in his intellectual charity to the "common man", though if you want to start a club where "only male, Japhetic, religio-scientific pastors can be citizens of the Republic; these are the ecclesiastical Dukes." are deemed worthy to claim they "understand" the CTMU, that's fine, though I look forward to the day when females or "non-Japhetic" people are considered intellectual capable of fully appreciating Christopher Langan's work.

"Chris Langan has been published as a columnist in several newspapers and magazines. He did publish an ebook in 2002, a diverse collection of essays entitled "The Art of Knowing". In addition, he published an essay - "Cheating the Millennium", Chapter 13 - in the book "Uncommon Dissent" edited by William Dembski. This references his CTMU paper published in ISCID. He is currently working on several technical papers explaining the theory's impact on physical and biological causality (since his CTMU work receives no outside financial support, its development proceeds as he finds the time for it)."http://www.iscid.org/boards/ubb-get_topic-f-26-t-000011.html

"I'm writing a book on the CTMU now. I really bend over backwards to
explain all my concepts as lucidly as possible. But what you may not
realize is that it takes literally ten times the space to do that! All
those jawbreakers and neologisms contain compressed information, and in
order to express it in what you call "plain English", you'd have to
decompress it at a ratio of 1-to-10(20,30,...)! I can't afford to spend
all day writing email for an unarchived list."http://www.polymath-systems.com/langlang/llmay99b.html
May 23 at 9:14am

Mars Turner Right, I am refering to the issue of who should be citizens. Simplifying one's arguments will help everyone.
May 23 at 9:19am

Hamid Javanbakht "That is why in the Republic of ecclesiastical Dukes, the ones who understand the CTMU are called "Dukes", the rest are subjects, the goal is to create as many Dukes as possible."
...
"Right, I am refering to the issue of who should be citizens."

Depends on context, if only citizens may call themselves "Dukes", and "Dukes" are those who according to you "understand" the CTMU, then only white Christian males "truly" understand the CTMU?
May 23 at 9:51am

Mars Turner What you are refering to is called a "Denizen". In the original American Republic, women and free non-whites were considered Denizens; they have property rights, but they are not allowed to vote or hold public office.
May 23 at 10:41am

Hamid Javanbakht It's good to have options of course...Let's say there are people who want to live according to the principles of the CTMU, do they need to set up a separate jurisdiction? No, because that would only create an arificial distinction, and the CTMU if anything has tried to promote a theologically/linguistically inclusive/unified model for a "spiritual metalanguage" (more so than Chomsky's transformational/universal grammar).

If anything it would be nice to see if there are those who can demonstrate their understanding of the CTMU in a paper which is "peer-reviewed" and approved by Langan himself.

Since he is less than accessible most of the time, we have tried to grow our Facebook group and one member has started a CTMU Wiki...I have my own user page there ("related work" and "isotelesis").

http://www.ctmucommunity.org/isotelesis

Since the rest of the "non-Dukes" probably aren't interested in being your "subjects" (somewhat contradictory how you combine a the notion of "subject" as found in a Monarchy with a supposedly "Republican" state)...and since being a "citizen" separates one from the "non-citizens", even though in reality their "difference" is only superficial, they may be considered a variety of "isoteleis" or "isoteleia"...neither citizens or subjects of anyone, in other words

"II. Privileged Non-Citizens. (Isoteleis).
We find certain classes of persons at Athens holding, in respect to private rights, a position intermediate between that of citizens and that of aliens. These persons were really aliens upon whom a portion of the rights peculiar to citizenship had been specially conferred. And since such privileges were generally conferred by special legislative decree, there might be persons strictly belonging, in respect to private rights, to no one class, but holding a civil status quite sui generis.
The only class, perhaps, known to us, and with a distinct name of its own, that falls under this head, is that of the isoteleis. These were a privileged class of metoikoi, who (besides being exempt from the special tax on metoikoi, and in this point on the same footing as citizens—whence the name) needed no prostate's for the transaction of legal business, but could act independently. We find examples of isoteleis holding real estate; but it is not certain that all isoteleis necessarily had enkte'sis."
http://tinyurl.com/2c83oz5

enkte-sis: tenure of land or house by a noncitizen. It was one of various privileges (see also isoteleia) which could be…
http://www.crcnetbase.com/doi/pdf/10.4324/9780203799
May 23 at 10:47am

Mars Turner You now have three posts that say the same thing. Why?
May 23 at 10:49am

Hamid Javanbakht Posting from iPhone, no editing option.
May 23 at 10:50am

Mars Turner I am posting from my computer, and even I can't edit this kind of post. I think you can only edit a discussion forum post.
May 23 at 10:52am

Mars Turner You can however post what you ment to say, and then delete your repeats.
May 23 at 10:53am

Mars Turner A denizen is not necessarily a women or non-white. It is a classification of a person.
May 23 at 11:02am

Mars Turner You are welcome to reference Ancient Athens for law, but I suggest you familiarize yourself with more modern law on the same exact topic. Call it a "denizen" or an "isotelic", it doesn't matter, if it means the same thing.
May 23 at 11:03am

Hamid Javanbakht Hamid Javanbakht {What you are refering to is called a "Denizen".}

The "isotelic" class in Ancient Athens were actually different from "denizens" per se, they were independent aliens, not necessarily women or non-white...they didn't hold public offices, but that didn't mean they didn't have equal status in private circles...synthesizing the notion...
See More
May 23 at 11:04am

Mars Turner {You can however post what you ment to say, and then delete your repeats.}

Of course that will goof up the order of our communication. lol
May 23 at 11:11am

Hamid Javanbakht The concept of a "denizen" in British common law is abstractly quite different from the "isotelic" class in Ancient Athens...a denizen was granted some of the rights of British *subjects* under a monarch, while the isotely were granted the "equal rights" (isopolity) of Athenian *citizens*...and as Plato (originator of the cocept of a Republic) ...
See More
May 23 at 12:03pm

Mars Turner A denizen is not necessarily under a monarch. The original American Republic had no monarch, yet women and free non-whites were considered Denizens.

I don't see why this is so confusing for you.
May 23 at 12:22pm

Hamid Javanbakht Perhaps it should be called a "Federal Constitutional Monarchy" with Prince William of England as your divinely appointed white Christian male leader rather than a "Republic", where (at least in Plato's version) "philosopher kings" would be more appropriate than "Dukes"...though in your system they're probably very similar.

"A federal monarchy is ...
See More
May 23 at 12:43pm

Hamid Javanbakht What you seem to be confusing is "denizen" with "isotely", the latter of which included white males as well...denizens were usually considered inferior to citizens, while isotels were considered "equal in weight and respectability" and had much more interaction with the higher more "cultivated class" of society.

"Denization is an obsolete process in English Common Law, dating from the 13th century, by which a foreigner became a denizen, gaining some privileges of a British subject, including the right to hold English land, through letters patent. Denization fell into disuse when statutory mechanisms for naturalisation developed."http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denization
May 23 at 12:50pm

Mars Turner Each Duke governs over a church which can be considered a "Monarchy". But each Duke is also considered a citizen of the confederal constitutional Republic, and the church's, can be considered States of the confederal constitutional Republic. As you can see, the Republic doesn't have a monarch, it is made up of monarchs.
May 23 at 1:37pm

Mars Turner "denizen" has nothing to do with whether someone is considered inferior or not, it is merely a classification of a person on whether or not they have political rights
May 23 at 1:42pm

Mars Turner a citizen has political AND property rights, where as a denizen only has property rights
May 23 at 1:44pm

Hamid Javanbakht Some more history:

"Equal Liberty and Justice Under Law:

Isonomia — equal law — is the historical and philosophical foundation of liberty, justice, and constitutional democracy. Aristotle considered it the core ingredient of a civilization that seeks to promote individual and societal happiness. First ordained by the ancient Athenian lawgiver Solon (c. 638-558 B.C.), isonomia was later championed by the Roman Republic's finest orator, Cicero; but it was subsequently eclipsed for a millennium, until (in effect) "rediscovered" in the eleventh century A.D. by the founders of the Western Legal Tradition, the law students of Bologna who synthesized the Greek genius for systematic thought, the Roman genius for pragmatic administration, and the medieval Judeo-Christian-Islamic preoccupation with the "uses" of faith and reason to secure a common humanity under a common deity.

Empathy, Liberty, Equality. These concepts are often linked, a triune "much of a muchness"; there is a good reason for this; it is rooted in the history of the idea of isonomia, the parent of demokratia.

Our most precious legacy is our understanding — originating in our evolving capacity for empathy — that we must be equal in our liberties and hence equal in the restraints upon our liberties.

We must be equal under the law, and hence equal in the making of laws. Liberty and law are coevolving, and any "constitutional democracy" worthy of this oh-so-precious name must reflect that sequence of foundational ideas.

I believe that Socrates' metaphor captures and "domesticates" the deep wisdoms of that ancient Greek trinity of ontology, epistemology, and teleology; he bends philosophy to his will, to human purposes, in ways that still ring true.

The art of the helmsman requires integrating knowledge of the changeless stars with knowledge of the naturally-changing — the winds and waves of circumstance — in order to choose, and act, and react, with reference to the angle of the rudder, the trim of the sail, but more ... to change these (a) in relation to each other, for each affects the other, and (b) in relation to achieving an ultimate goal, such as safe passage across open seas to prosperous harbors.

This is the art of cybernetics — goal-focused governance that cultivates and harvests feedback, continuously monitoring "progress" in light of hierarchies of facts and values, including ultimate objectives. Law is the quintessential cybernetic calling."http://www.jurlandia.org/isonomia.htm

"Rich and poor Athenian Citizens were political and legal equals: each citizen was an equal voter (isopsephos), enjoyed an equal rift to public speech (isegoria), and an equal standing before the law (isonomia), political and legal equality (isotes)
...
others were granted remission of the head-tax ordinarily paid by resident foreigners (isoteleia).
...
Indeed, even the story of the Athenians as a pure "earthborn" race was counterbalanced by the equally well-known and celebrated story of Athenian receptiveness to foreign immigrants in mythological times."

"Isoteleia or isopoliteia was a term used for the set of privileges to which Metic could be granted.
This personal privileges were:

ἐπιγαμία/epigamía, the right to a mixed marriage; ἔγκτησις/enktêsis,the right to purchase land;
ἀτέλεια/ateleia, exemption from taxes, especially ἀτέλεια μετοικίου/ateleia metoikíou, a tax levied on thepolicy residentMetic. All these privileges were all included in the right isoteleia ("equal responsibility") or isopoliteia ("equal citizenship") and the people who enjoyed this right were ἰσοτελεῖς/isoteleis. They had the same burdens as citizens and could call in the courts or trading without the intervention of the προστάτης/prostátês."
http://tinyurl.com/28wfm5k

"At Athens all resident aliens had to pay a tax (metoikion or xenikon telos) which we may term protection-tax, because it was the price for the protection they enjoyed at Athens; but as it was the interest of the state to increase commerce, and for that purpose to attract strangers to settle at Athens, many of them were exempted from this tax, i. e. enjoyed the ateleia metoikiou, (isoteleia equal rights) (Dem. c.Aristae): p. 691), and some were even exempted from custom duties, and the property tax or eisphora from which an Athenian citizen could never be exempted. The ateleia enjoyed by Athenian citizens was either a general immunity (ateleia apanton), such as was granted to persons who had done some great service to their country, and even to their descendants, as in the case of Harmodius and Aristogeiton; or it was a partial one exempting a person from all or certain liturgies, from certain custom duties, or from service in the army." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ateleia_%28ancient_Greece%29

"Focusing on the analysis of Athens' relations with both Greeks and non-Greeks as recorded in extant fourth-century decrees, this paper challenges the applicability of the notion of Greek/barbarian antithesis to the interpretation of formal diplomatic exchanges between Athens and the non-Greek states. A comparison of the types of decrees and honors reveals a remarkable uniformity in the forms of Athens' foreign relations irrespective of the ethnicity of honorands. The distribution of honors among individuals and groups of recipients within single decrees further demonstrates that the Athenian honorific system typically elevated individuals over communities they represented, suggesting that political differences between Athens and non-Greek states did not adversely influence the methods of exchanges between them. Apart from the provisions contained in the decrees, this paper also considers their function within the city as monuments that attest to the important place of philobarbaric discourse and practice in fourth-century Athens."[LINK REMOVED]
May 23 at 3:11pm

Hamid Javanbakht The actual motivation for the different concept of "isotelesis" actually has more to do with "teleological consistency" and "closed descriptive manifolds" in a decision-theoretic and teleo-semantic sense.

"In the CTMU, “what God thinks is right” is encapsulated by the Telic Principle. This principle, a generalization of the Cosmological Anthropic Principle, asserts that by logical necessity, there exists a deic analogue of human volition called teleology.
However, due to the fact that God’s Self-creative freedom is distributed over the universe, i.e. His “Mind”, human volition arising within the universe is free to be locally out of sync with teleology. This requires a set of compensation mechanisms which ensure that teleology remains globally valid despite the localized failure of any individual or species to behave consistently with it. In part, these mechanisms determine the state of your relationship to God, i.e. your soul. If you are in harmony with teleology – with the self-realization and self-expression of God – then your soul is in a state of grace. If you are not, then your soul is in danger of interdiction by teleological mechanisms built into the structure of the universe." Moral Laws

"Polytely (from Greek roots meaning 'many goals') can be described as frequently, complex problem-solving situations characterized by the presence of not one, but several goals, endings. Modern society faces an increasing incidence of various complex problems. In other words, the defining characteristics of our complex problems are a large number of variables (complexity) that interact in a nonlinear fashion (connectivity), changing over time (dynamic and time-dependent), and to achieve multiple goals (polytely)." Polytely

"There is thus an isomorphic teleological structure in terms of goals and their ordering which underlies legal doctrine." (UnderlyingIsomorphic Teleological Structuresat Philosophical, Economic, Practical, and Doctrinal Levels)Tort Theory

"Problems are defined by the perception of the difference between a final state (sough after) and an actual state (unwanted). Decision problems are well-structured if the decider is familiar with their initial state and the goal state as well as a defined set of transitions. Funke defined complex problems as being intransparent, having multiple goals (called Polytely), situational complexity, and time-delayed effects [2]. Environmental problems usually are complex and ill-structured or ill-defined [3]. In such situations decision research does not offer a dominant paradigm but resorts to concepts and methods put forth by many scientific fields, like sociology, administrative sciences, political sciences, or psychology. Cognitive strategies of participants, be they individuals or groups, may greatly differ. "The optimum solution cannot be unambiguously determined. Only the relative best of the solutions found can be detected [4]. "Good" decisions are "good" in relation to the goals envisaged. Thus, the problem recognition and -- indirectly -- the goal discussion are important." The Third International Conference on Politics and Information Systems: Technologies and Applications jointly with The International Symposium on Social and Organizational Informatics and Cybernetics

"Language, too, is characterized by the isotelic and polytelic principles; there are many words for each meaning and most words have more than one meaning. The two principles apply equally to a variety of other biological, behavioral, and social phenomena."

"Keith Holyoak and Paul Thagard (1997) developed their multiconstraint theory within structure mapping theory. They defend that the "coherence" of an analogy depends on structural consistency, semantic similarity and purpose. Structural consistency is maximal when the analogy is an isomorphism, although lower levels are admitted. Similarity demands that the mapping connects similar elements and relations of source and target, at any level of abstraction."Analogy
May 23 at 5:27pm

Mars Turner no taxes or tithing allowed
May 23 at 5:45pm




----------------------------------------------------------------------------------




Hisham M Nazer

My friends are cordially requested to leave their answers to these questions.

1. Theist or Atheist?
2. Believe in one religion or in all (spirituality)?
3. Sentimental about only respective country, and reluctant about others?
4. Define Love and your idea about the betterment of humanity.

This is important. Please take few minutes to answer them. ♥
11 hours ago via Mobile Web · Comment · Like

Kaniz Keya 1. Agnostic
2. Again Agnostic
3. Reluctant
4. Love is critical & divine feeling. Practice humanity through sinful thinking.....means think beyond personal experiences.
11 hours ago

Shykh Newaz Romantic love is pain. Better is friendship :)
10 hours ago

Suzanne Michelle 1. Theist
2. I believe in Spirituality...all religions...one Source which is Love.
3. We are all ONE...distance and time mean nothing....we are all united in the heart. We are not separated in the soul by race, ethnicity,culture or geographical location.
4. I cannot define love. Love just IS. It is at the core of everyone and everything. We were born from LOVE and LOVE is all there is. Love is all we need. The more we honor ourselves and love ourselves the better able we are to share this love to the world and honor everyone in this world. We are all ONE spirit....there is no real separation. We all come from LOVE ~~~~ ♥
10 hours ago

Madana Dookieram 1. Theist - believe in some of the theory that is written about the god head
2. Believe in all religion - very spiritual
3. Sentimental about - Egypt, Greece, Italy, India, Japan
4. True love is the ability to see good in all things. It is the ability to love someone regardless of what they have said and done. Humanity will only evolve if all humans accept the differences in each other. hope that helps :)
10 hours ago

Paul Sultanik 1. Theist,,,,,in a more untraditional, abstract, idealistinc way (inclusive).

2. spirtual / Love / unity / undefined limits / universal / dimentional

3. sentimental same as above!

4. Unconditional / altruistic / eternal / core value / commited

any of the above may change without prior notice...:)
9 hours ago

Liliana Alam As always Hisham, excellent questions of unexplainable matters put concisely to encourage explainable expression between beings. Thank you.

1. Neither Theist nor Atheist. I simultaneously think (and believe) that there is Nothing, and Everything. Logic and no logic, existence of metaphysical transcendence and existence of human delusion. The truth can lie both within the self and externally, but to put human terms on what the truth is, is a futile act.
2. It is people that invented religion, not the other way around. Therefore for me to say that I do not believe in religion would be to say I do not believe in people-which I do. The core essence of all religions from Hinduism to Christianity to Wiccan to Agnostic is the hope for truth and the belief that seeking it will lead to answers. This hope I believe in. That it is possible to ascertain one ultimate truth I question.
3. I can no more love my left leg than my right leg, my brain from my heart. Each country, as is each person, as is each plant, animal, chemical and life form is entirely unique in it's positives, negativities and neutralities. I neither Love all nor do I feel Detached towards all. All is, as it is.
4. "What is sacred? What is the spirit made of? What is worth living for? What is worth dying for? > Love." Between individuals it is everything from beautiful horrific evil romance to total mergence of one with another, to parenthood to friendship of souls. As a whole-And individually, that which is more than the self, is Love. This ties in directly with the improvement of humanity. However as my own mother often has said, "I have yet to meet a real altruist."

I will finish by saying that all of this is at the subterranean base, completely undefinable. Defining it only lessens value. But what is glorious in the game of communication is that beings feel this "undefinable-ness" Thru, and by practicing, all of what is the very earthly, "definable". A most beautiful paradox.