This is where I’ve ended up thanks to Constructive Mathematics (Intuitionism, Intuitional Mathematics, Neointuitionism).
Logic: I apply the same requirement of operational language (strict construction) to logic – the logic of language. Of all the logics, the logic of language is the most misleading. I have the most work to do here. Much to the disappointment of practitioners of formal logic. Most of the mistakes I have come across (particularly in critical rationalism) are caused by erroneous elimination of action from that which depends upon action.
Math: In mathematics – the logic of names, numbers and relations. This work has been done by the generations before me. They just have not had the moral criticism I have given them as an argumentative weapon before in their attack on ‘magical’ mathematics.
Physics: It’s already present in the canons of science, and is already universally applied in physics – the logic of causality. There is very little work to be done here other than to cast some branches of physics as non-logical as currently stated.
Cooperation: I apply the same argument to the logic of cooperation (ethics). Ethics was the easiest problem to solve by the requirement for operational language (strict constructionism).
i) The world is real, our actions are likewise real within that world.
ii) There is only one MORAL and ETHICAL epistemological method, and that is the scientific method – or ‘the method’.
iii) We have invented multiple methodologies of logic that help us isolate certain properties within this method.
iv) Statements produced by this method are ‘theories’.
v) Some theories can be logically treated axiomatically even though they are not in fact axioms but theories.
Knowledge of use is not equal to knowledge of construction.
MOTIVATIONS: ELIMINATION OF LOADING, FRAMING, DECEPTION, OBSCURANTISM, AND PSEUDOSCIENCE FROM POLITICAL DISCOURSE.
Law is but another logic. Politics is discourse on law. There is no logical specialization to citizenship save the logic of cooperation and even that specialization will forever be above the masses. If we are to eliminate deception from political discourse, we must eliminate it in all the logics. I was not correct that immorality in language originated with mathematics. Only that mathematical legitimacy was used as a means for expanding pseudoscience.
Just because something is convenient, if it is immoral, it remains immoral. Obscurantism, platonism, and use without comprehension of construction, are all forms of deception that insert magic and religion into the world.
Most of these conveniences are easy means of compensating for the problem of reducing any ‘computation’ into the two or three second window of human cognitive ability. However, as long as we can construct from operations, any entity, we can forever use the name of that construction as a function – giving us a shorthand for it that fits within our cognitive window.
I am sorry for labeling conveniences and contrivances as immoral, despite the cherished mythos that philosophers, logicians and mathematicians have warmed themselves in against the cold of realism. But no one else has yet attacked platonism as immoral. And I’ve done it I think pretty conclusively.
If you can purvey platonism, then others can equally claim to purvey mysticism, obscurantism, pseudoscience, loading and framing. Because if utility is the only tests, then religion is clearly superior to rational politics, and pseudoscience an effective means of governing (keynesianism), and the mind finds greater comfort in loading, framing, conflation and justifying, than it does in grasping objective reality.
Sorry, but if you can’t construct it, you don’t understand it. And the reason you don’t understand it is probably a cover for a lie.
Certainly that’s what’s happened in math and logic. Most of philosophy, continental in particular is deception. Justification. Lie.
The only moral statements are those under strict construction.