We note that perspective is always relevant which makes it a consideration of logic, reason, and rationality. Furthermore, using Einsteinian limitations, we note that each of us then has only a limited view of logic, reason, and rationality. Szabo re-levates points that explain each of our individual complexity is unique to ourselves and not fully transferable to any other individual. Technology is limited to economic advance, this includes language. Language in this context is a technology that arises (naturally) as a compressed representation of knowledge that is passed between individuals. As language and technology in general evolve, our ability to transfer larger amount of useful information grows. But there is still some necessary limit to this.
Adam Smith discusses the impartial spectator and the relation of reason and consideration to propriety. Society it seems at its (calculus) limit tends towards this impartiality. It also seems that society tends towards and idealness, by natural order, although we do not seem to fully accept this collectively.
We can see the academic peer review process, and the adoption of bitcoin through the bitcoin.pdf whitepaper, as examples of the proper use and change of propriety.
I think it is quite coherent to suggest that logic, reason, rationality, are exactly tied to propriety. If that is unacceptable I would like to suggest at least that purposefully supporting this direction individually or as a whole will not bring harm to the individual or whole.
This supports implicate order, time travel, and all past discoveries that we’re later shown to be not conducive with observable experiment.