DISTINGUISHING PHILOSOPHY FROM MORAL LITERATURE (getting better at saying this)

DISTINGUISHING PHILOSOPHY FROM MORAL LITERATURE

(getting better at saying this)

Most ‘philosophers’ are either ‘readers’ narrating the story of their learning, or dreamers, sharing the story of their dreams, or teachers, reciting the plot lines of moral literature.

History, The Common Law and Economics are the three empirical tools we have for examining man’s demonstrated actions, irrespective of his self-reporting. Unfortunately, most philosophy, unlike history, law, and economics, but very much like literature, surveys and polls, consists of self-reporting.

There are a few of us who conduct investigations into sentient(epistemic) and cooperative(ethical and political and martial) sciences, in an attempt to suggest how we might alter conceptual ‘institutions’ (objects, relations, properties, and the explanatory narratives, frames, and loadings), normative insitutions (values, manners, ethics, morals, goals, and decidability), informal institutions (religion, myth, and ritual), and formal institutions (money, ccredit, banking, contract, law, political systems, military systems, territorial systems).

The difference in how different philosophers do this work, like heroic, virtue, rule, and outcome ethics, determined by the amout of knowledge of moral literature, history, law, economics, physical science, and the fine arts, that we have collected.

It is easier now than in the past to possess information across that breadth of topics – but it is still extremely difficult to conduct a research program across that many disciplines.

But that is what it takes to reorganize conceptual, normative, informal, and formal institutions by scientific rather than wishful, or dreamlike means;

Curt Doolittle

The Propertarian Institute

Kiev, Ukraine.