–“the left and right both argue for inclusion but along different lines.”– A Friend

Dysgenic expansion on the left (female), vs eugenic expansion on the right (male)

Female and male strategies compete. Or perhaps ‘adapt’ is a better way of looking at it.

So ‘along different lines’ obscure that those lines are not ‘relative’ but produce vastly different externalities.

This is an example why I use operational langauge and full accounting – I don’t leave obscurant statements un accounted for.

1 – Operational Language (Operations are measurements)
2 – Deflated vocabular tested by series.
3 – Complete Sentences describing complete transactions.
4 – Testing Rational Choice, and Reciprocity
5 – Accounting for the seen (internal) and unseen (external).

By simple use of operational grammar (the rules I just stated) we test categorical, logical, empirical, existential, rational, reciprocal, fully accounted prose just a surely as we test any statement in other logics and mathematics.

In other words, just as all other forms of calculation falsify but do not justify, operational grammar falsified but does not justify.

The only difference is that operational grammar is complete in that it includes all actionable dimensions of reality, not some subset or general rule of reality.

If one cannot make such a statement in operational language he knows not of what he speaks. He just uses convention and habit like any other storyteller.