(Sisyphean Tasks) I am writing this (long) piece to the Evonomics tribe in an at

(Sisyphean Tasks)

I am writing this (long) piece to the Evonomics tribe in an attempt to support their ends but correct their justifications and means.

I won’t quite say I see pseudoscience in it, but I do see a failure to understand intellectual history, and a misdiagnosis of the problem of contemporary economics: decidability that can only be provided by the choice between eugenic, compromise, or dysgenic ends.

While they make a few good criticisms of the financiers – the conversion from market for commons and rule of law to discretionary authoritarian rule by credit/fiat money.

I’ve been working on it four about three hours? Maybe two and a half. And I”m tired. …. I feel like Sisyphus.

Everyone wants to do the right thing but they can’t grasp that the only possible right thing is exchange under which no one gets the best they want, we all just get the best we can. (Nash Equilibrium).

And why can’t they grasp it? They are overwhelmingly incapable of judging that their moral intuitions are ‘correct’ – but they aren’t.

I have another piece that I haven’t finished on the problems with contemporary economics.

And you know, I seem to have this limit – that at somewhere between 2500-3500 words I get tired of trying to make these points. But they are probably 4500-9000 word problems. lol.

Most authors get to where they conceptually think in 750 work chunks. This corresponds to most people’s information assimilation limits (time which they can concentrate on an issue). I’m sort of getting there myself. I tend to think in those terms now. And I like to break arguments into those chunks. And I find that get frustrated if I have to write longer pieces.

So I am breaking this one into smaller chunks. But I still have to finish before I lose interest in pushing the rock up the hill one more time.

Sigh.

Morality isn’t what you think it is. Sorry.

We can calculate it but you can’t feel it. You’re just one data point. We can know what’s immoral. But choosing the moral is a matter of cooperation, not conviction.

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine