Author: Curt Doolittle

  • 1) Inbreeding (bad) < Near Breeding(good) > Outbreeding (bad) 2) the majority of

    1) Inbreeding (bad) < Near Breeding(good) > Outbreeding (bad)
    2) the majority of the clerisy consisted of second third and such sons of the nobility and aristocracy. The church was a holding company for the nobility and aristocracy because of primogeniture. the church prohibited near breeding to break up the land holdings of the great families so that the church could control the land and be the largest employer of serfs in europe. The church and the monasteries were the white collar class and the positions were oftenn sold off to the wealthy or educated for profits. This is why there were so many attempts at reforming the church from the monastic movement, to the reformation – it was the most corrupt organization in europe after the jews and their use of credit for baiting into hazard.

    If you don’t know economics you don’t know incentives and you don’t know how to read history and as such are a victim of the fact that most of it if not all is propaganda.

    Reply addressees: @DustinofApollon @radiofreenw


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 04:10:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748920939662696448

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748918901214433630

  • DECIDABILITY (ACTION) The Satisfaction of Demand For Infallibility A question (o

    DECIDABILITY (ACTION)
    The Satisfaction of Demand For Infallibility

    A question (or statement) is Decidable (true or false: consistent, correspondent, possible; good or bad, and sufficient) if (a) an algorithm (argument, or set of operations) exists within the limits of the system (domain: set of axioms, rules, theories) that one can use to produce a decision and (b) if sufficient information for the decision is present within the system such that, (c) one need not appeal to either information outside of the system, or DISCRETION (INTUITION, VALUES) to supply information necessary to DECIDE.

    Ergo, if DISCRETION (choice) is unnecessary, a proposition is DECIDABLE. If Discretion is necessary then the question may be DISCRETIONARY (subjective choice) but it is not DECIDABLE (objective).

    Or for the most reductive version: the subjective requires appeal to intuition (judgment) and the objective requires only appeal to present information.

    |Choice| Decidable > Discretionary(opinion) > Choice(preference, presumed good) > Random Selection (undecidable) > In-actionable

    The purpose of our method is to produce decidability as a means of circumventing the dependence on discretion and choice. By our diligent production of decidability we produce a value independent universal language of testimony in all subjects; but particularly in the subjects most vulnerable to discretionary impulse: cooperation, ethics, morality, and politics.

    Note: This emphasis on decidability explains the difference between rule of law (decidable) and rule by discretion (undecidable, and therefore subjective discretion or choice are required). If discretion is required, then it is rule by discretion (choice) if not, then rule of law.

    Demand For Increasingly Infallible Decidability

    In an effort to avoid the mistake of relying upon an Ideal Type, we will describe a spectrum, or ordered hierarchy of Demand for DECIDABILITY. That way we do not ask the universe to fit our definition, but that we provide a definition that corresponds to decidability in all cases we can perceive in the universe.

    Spectrum of Decidability:

    Intelligible: Decidable enough to imagine a conceptual relationship
    Reasonable: Decidable enough for me to feel confident about my decision (that it will satisfy my needs, and is not a waste of time, energy, resource )
    Actionable: Decidable enough for me to take actions that produce positive results.
    Moral: Decidable enough for me to not cause others to react negatively to me, if they have knowledge of my actions.
    Normative: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion among my fellow people with similar values.
    Judicial: Decidable enough to resolve a conflict without subjective opinion across different peoples with different values.
    Scientific: Decidable regardless of all opinions or perspectives (β€˜True’)
    Logical(Analytic): Decidable out of physical or logical necessity
    Tautological: Decidably identical in properties (referents) if not references (terms).
    Ideal: Decidable if we possess the knowledge we do not and cannot, but wish we did. πŸ˜‰

    So to borrow the one of many terms from Economics, we can see in this series (list) a market demand for increasingly infallible decidability.

    The Methods of Decidability

    We can also separate the actions of intuiting (intuition), from reasoning (all processes of the mind), from rationalism (justification), from calculation (in the wider sense – transformation of inputs into outputs) from computation (algorithm).

    |DECIDABLE| Unintelligible(Incomprehensible) > Intelligible(Comprehensible) > Possible (actionable) > Preferable > Good (Normative, Moral) > Decidable(Judicial) > True (scientific) > Analytically True (logical) > Tautologically True (Tautological)

    and

    |COGNITION| Comprehensible > Imaginable > Reasonable > Rational > Calculable > Computational > Identical

    and

    |METHOD| Experiential(emotional) > Rational (law : Social or Contractual) Theoretic (science: existential) > Axiomatic(logic: mental) >

    Each of these methods of reasoning depends upon a different degree of demand for the infallibility of decidability.

    So when we say we can decide a question, we mean it satisfies the demand for the infallibility of decidability.

    Note: This technique, where we test the satisfaction of demand for infallibility, will frame most of our thinking, and it is the principle difference between logical, philosophical, scientific, and legal thought. That is because it is the most complete of logical, philosophical, scientific, and legal thought.

    Cheers
    -CD


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 04:04:47 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748919545606148096

  • Yes well I don’t think I”m missing it since I talk about it constantly. Instead

    Yes well I don’t think I”m missing it since I talk about it constantly. Instead I’m making the point about the group’s strategy. I group everything related to reproduction into demographics and traditions and norms. πŸ˜‰

    SO yes, I suppose I could pay more attention to it given that the european miracle includes multiple innovations most importantly bipartite manorialism above teh hajnal line. Despite the ‘sh-t’ idea of the church that prohibited near breeding and prevented our smartest people (the clerisy) from reproducing.

    Reply addressees: @radiofreenw


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 03:12:06 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748906286647816192

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748902366257000756

  • 27B losses by Startups from VCs in the first eleven months of 2023 and the data

    27B losses by Startups from VCs in the first eleven months of 2023 and the data isn’t comprehensive and discounts the total. And that number doesn’t include big publicly funded startups that collapses. or the 45B that was burned by Facebook on the metaverse. …. It’s just the evidence of changing interest rates creating the boom and riasing interest rates ending it.

    I can’t believe the sh-t ideas that were funded by VCs. Absolutely ridiculous.

    https://t.co/ZdUUeaj5nm


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 03:08:10 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748905295068200960

  • I don’t think that is within the institute’s mission but It’s possible at some t

    I don’t think that is within the institute’s mission but It’s possible at some time that might be the case. Representing yourself is a matter of learning court procedure and you can learn that from books and practicing in front of a mirror.

    After procedure you do need to understand the law.

    Remember that our mission at the institute is to repair the law and constrain the state and reverse it’s excesses – it is not to teach people who are better served by representation in court how to get into trouble lol πŸ˜‰

    Reply addressees: @RoilinBoils


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 01:25:02 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748879340979228672

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748869162582032510

  • GREAT QUESTION? ADVICE FROM OTHERS PLS? —“If a young American man early 20s wa

    GREAT QUESTION? ADVICE FROM OTHERS PLS?
    —“If a young American man early 20s wanted to learn the type of law you write about in your tweets, should he go to law school?”—

    Hmmm…. I think you’d want to learn my work first and THEN study law if you decided on a career as a lawyer. Learn what’s true first and then what we have instead second. It’s harder to relearn if you ‘learn it wrong’ in the first place, so learn it right in the first place. πŸ˜‰

    In college, to learn the same material, you’d want to study cognitive science, behavioral economics, micro, institutional economics and political economy, economic history, history as comparative civilization, and the philosophy of science, and at least one semester of simple programming to get a feel for the logic.

    But in my opinion you’ll be able to take the course from us sooner than you’ll get through courses elsewhere. πŸ˜‰


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 00:11:33 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748860850868228097

  • Hugs AD. Thank you. πŸ˜‰

    Hugs AD. Thank you. πŸ˜‰


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-21 00:00:44 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748858125682163888

    Reply addressees: @adominguez792

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748838128234688598

  • Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. A lot. πŸ˜‰

    Thank you so much. I really appreciate it. A lot. πŸ˜‰


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-20 22:27:57 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748834778185711645

    Reply addressees: @zwholetruth

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748833696935731608

  • TERMS IN EVOLUTIONARY SEQUENCE {Geography > Resources > Competitors > Demographi

    TERMS IN EVOLUTIONARY SEQUENCE
    {Geography > Resources > Competitors > Demographic Composition > Stage of Development } > Group Evolutionary Strategy > Metaphysical Presumptions > Mythologies (narratives) > ~Religion(in the broad sense) > methods of conveyance > methods of argument (and lying) > Sequence of Formation of Elites > Sequence of Formation of Institutions > Anchoring Effect of the Sequence of Institutional formation > Resulting Group Strategy.)

    THE SPECTRUM OF GRAMMARS OF COGNITION:
    Definitions. Each term can be understood as follows:
    Metaphysics: The foundational branch of philosophy concerned with understanding the fundamental nature of reality and being. It involves abstract concepts such as existence, time, objecthood, and identity.

    Theology: The study of the nature of the divine, encompassing various religious beliefs and practices. Theology often interprets religious texts and seeks to understand the nature and will of deities
    .
    Philosophy: A broad field that uses reason and logic to explore fundamental questions about knowledge, existence, ethics, and the human mind. Philosophy underpins many other disciplines by providing a framework for questioning and understanding.

    Ideology: A system of beliefs or ideas, especially those that form the basis of economic, political, or social theory and policy. Ideologies shape our perception of the world and influence our actions within it.

    Empiricism: A philosophical approach that emphasizes the role of sensory experience and evidence in the formation of ideas. It argues that knowledge is primarily derived from sensory experience.

    Science: A systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe. Science relies on empirical methods for gathering data and formulating theories.

    Operationalism: (first principles): Computational or Operational Logic: A field that combines logic with the principles of computation. It is concerned with the use of algorithms, computation, and formal systems to solve problems, make decisions, and understand reasoning processes.

    THE COORDINATION PROBLEM OF THE NOW
    So AFAIK we require some means of creating a metaphysical set of value judgements but the means of doing so can be any to all of the methods of conveying information above from the most intuitionistic and imaginary to the most rational and concrete – as suitable for the needs of the distribution of abilities in the population.

    But there are blocking agents in our existing thought.

    THE METAPHYSICAL BLOCKING AGENTS IN THE WEST
    The principle problem is searching for the good instead of the true – and then from the true discovering a possible good. In all known cases all religions and ideologies (and most philosophies) seek the good first and the true Is irrelevant. As such they contain the seeds of their own suicide as well as causing harms by externalities to the population as a consequence.

    Example: Spiritual Truth vs β€œMy Truth” vs > Darwinian Truth vs > Evidentiary Truth vs > Testimonial Truth vs > ideal truth vs analytic truth: Spiritual Truth is a β€˜good’ not a true, but it is true in the sense that it provides a means of decidability that provides a positive feedback in the context of the suppression of neuroticism that is endemic in uncertainty.

    Given:
    1 – All language consist of measurements
    2 – All language follows the universal grammar of continuous recursive disambiguation.
    3 – All paradigms simple permit or deny dimensions of measurement.

    And:
    1 – All logic is falsificationary not justificationary
    2 – Good first rather than true first.
    3 – Mathiness (verbalism, idealism) vs operationalism (actions, realism)
    4 – Darwinian everything is true for the above reasons.
    5 – Babbage’s failure set us back a century
    6 – philosophy and even analytic philosophy ended because of the above and was dead by the mid 1960s.
    7 – My observation is that the brain is easily explainable by a few general rules, and as such the blocking agent in matters of coordinating people by whatever Grammar (means of conveyance) is a hangover from theology philosophy and pseudoscience.

    Therefore:
    1 – So as far as I can tell, we advance in precision but in doing so advances in the grammars of abstraction. But as we advance in abstraction we can back-propagate reforms to the grammars of intuition and experience.

    So as we progress toward the most parsimonious consistency and correspondence, it should be possible to reform ideology, philosophy, and theology such that they are non-false in any meaningful way, but still provide their function which is an obtainable and usable system of reasoning suitable for the neurological organization of their brains.


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-20 22:14:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748831333214793728

  • Lincoln Michel is a perfect example of a dumb person’s midwittery. He engages in

    Lincoln Michel is a perfect example of a dumb person’s midwittery. He engages in banal, mainstream infantile feminine and left-wing social undermining signals as if they were ‘edgy’ despite the absence of any substantive argument. Then ridicules people much smarter, talented, and…


    Source date (UTC): 2024-01-20 21:47:09 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748824508301979990

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1748779888834662635