Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • A Very New Cut On Intellectual History

    (draft) [S]o Zoroastrianism was constructed to divide the Persians and indians who were both southern indo european peoples. Then the Talmud was constructed as a lie to justify retention of property after the end of the babylonian conquest. THE REVOLUTION The greeks invent reason, truth, science, politics for the management of people at scale. The Romans, seeing the ‘verbalism’ (immorality) of the greeks, resist greek idealism and embrace practical and empirical means. THE RESISTANCE BY DECEIT Then judaism evolved as a means by which to justify parasitism upon host civilizations while maintaining group cohesion. Then christianity was constructed as a rebellion against the empire, that had deprived primitive people of their local status signals. Then the bible was constructed to manage the hordes through false promise now that production by slavery was no longer possible. Then the koran was constructed to unite the tribes and conquer the peninsula (and then the exhausted Byzantines and Sassanids, and North Africa, and then Spain. ) THE FAILURES AT RESTORATION The Carolingians failed to construct an economic and political order. although the trade routes from Italy to the Netherlands and then to the north sea peoples created incremental organic evolution. The Templars created the legal and credit system and were destroyed by the authoritarian church who was their debtor. The Hansa recreated the legal, credit, and trade system. But were out-competed by the territorial powers that largely adopted their methods. The development of the new world and colonies allowed the financing of the transition of the west to economic modernity. (despite that there was little long term benefit to western nations, and strangely enough quite a considerable benefit to colonies depending upon who colonized them.) THE RESTORATION OF TRUTH Then the anglos responded with the enlightenment, empiricism, and the restoration of truth (science). The french responded with … rousseuan pseudoscience and pseudo morality, as a means of creating the terror, and attempting to unify all of europe under their despotism. The germans respond with restating christian mysticism as kantian rationalism. And create a new vehicle for obscurantism. The Jews responded by converting the hansa/templar system to their advantage in the territorial wars between Britain and France (Napoleonic wars) creating the Rothschild and consequent systems of order creation by using our own capital stock and lending it back to us. Westerners responded with the nation-state, an attempt to construct professional bureaucracy, the gold standard, empire and the industrial revolution. Most importantly, american constitution and it’s somewhat failed attempt at natural law expressed as a formal logic of cooperation. Jews responded with an attack on the academy and polity by creating the great pseudosciences: Boazian Sociology, Marxist Economics and Politics, Freudian Psychology. All of which were constructed to universalize separatist judaism or justify hosting jewish separatism despite it’s parasitisms. This merely taking the argumentatitve innovations of the french and germans combining them with the same obscurantist ‘preaching’ technique used to distribute Christianity, except now using the power of the printing press. BRANCH : We branch now into various evolutions upon this new religion – faster innovation in the technologies of truth and falsehood. Branch 1 – Jewish Then the second wave: Popperian philsophy, Misesian Economics, Randian/Rothbardian Libertinism. (the half-failure/half-success) Then the third wave: straussian neo-conservativsm and expansionary militarism of the ‘new rome’. (the madness of power) Branch 2 – Neo Puritan Then the adoption of Keyneisan Economics as the new innumerate pseudoscience. and Rawlsian Ethics as the pseudo morality. Then the adoption of postmodern philosophy in academia. THE FAILED REACTION Mises in economics, Brouwer in Mathematics, Bridgman in Physics (science), Popper in philosophy, A HOST of authors in Law. And a total catastrophic absence in Politics since majoritarianism was still influential everywhere. RESTORATION: Science catches up with the deceit and starts to disprove it. The various cognitive scientists, and neurologists, are largely responsible for our reframing of jewish monopoly conformity to western distribution of talents and abilities. EO Wilson states that a synthesis of biology, morality, politics and economics – all the sciences – should be possible. Archaeologists and historians and evolutionary biologists in our social orders. Haidt, the empirical psychologists, and the anthropologists in the evolution of cooperation. SYNTHESIS Doolittle in Economics, Politics, Ethics, Sociology, Psychology, Epistemology and Metaphysics. In retrospect this is my view of the evolution of history as a competition between the different european tribes, most of which practice morality and one of which practices immorality. And the reason being that if we hold land we can construct moral rules because we must in order to create the commons of land holding. A parasitic people that does not need or cannot hold land need not create commons because they can use the host’s. THE CENTRAL SUBJECT OF OUR DISCOURSE MUST BE THE COMMONS NOT THE INDIVIDUAL. Law is for individuals. Individuals must be able to act in their interests, limited by the prohibition on parasitism. But policy must exist for the production of commons that perpetuates the family, kin, tribe, and nation, or else it is just a lie to justify conquest. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • A Very New Cut On Intellectual History

    (draft) [S]o Zoroastrianism was constructed to divide the Persians and indians who were both southern indo european peoples. Then the Talmud was constructed as a lie to justify retention of property after the end of the babylonian conquest. THE REVOLUTION The greeks invent reason, truth, science, politics for the management of people at scale. The Romans, seeing the ‘verbalism’ (immorality) of the greeks, resist greek idealism and embrace practical and empirical means. THE RESISTANCE BY DECEIT Then judaism evolved as a means by which to justify parasitism upon host civilizations while maintaining group cohesion. Then christianity was constructed as a rebellion against the empire, that had deprived primitive people of their local status signals. Then the bible was constructed to manage the hordes through false promise now that production by slavery was no longer possible. Then the koran was constructed to unite the tribes and conquer the peninsula (and then the exhausted Byzantines and Sassanids, and North Africa, and then Spain. ) THE FAILURES AT RESTORATION The Carolingians failed to construct an economic and political order. although the trade routes from Italy to the Netherlands and then to the north sea peoples created incremental organic evolution. The Templars created the legal and credit system and were destroyed by the authoritarian church who was their debtor. The Hansa recreated the legal, credit, and trade system. But were out-competed by the territorial powers that largely adopted their methods. The development of the new world and colonies allowed the financing of the transition of the west to economic modernity. (despite that there was little long term benefit to western nations, and strangely enough quite a considerable benefit to colonies depending upon who colonized them.) THE RESTORATION OF TRUTH Then the anglos responded with the enlightenment, empiricism, and the restoration of truth (science). The french responded with … rousseuan pseudoscience and pseudo morality, as a means of creating the terror, and attempting to unify all of europe under their despotism. The germans respond with restating christian mysticism as kantian rationalism. And create a new vehicle for obscurantism. The Jews responded by converting the hansa/templar system to their advantage in the territorial wars between Britain and France (Napoleonic wars) creating the Rothschild and consequent systems of order creation by using our own capital stock and lending it back to us. Westerners responded with the nation-state, an attempt to construct professional bureaucracy, the gold standard, empire and the industrial revolution. Most importantly, american constitution and it’s somewhat failed attempt at natural law expressed as a formal logic of cooperation. Jews responded with an attack on the academy and polity by creating the great pseudosciences: Boazian Sociology, Marxist Economics and Politics, Freudian Psychology. All of which were constructed to universalize separatist judaism or justify hosting jewish separatism despite it’s parasitisms. This merely taking the argumentatitve innovations of the french and germans combining them with the same obscurantist ‘preaching’ technique used to distribute Christianity, except now using the power of the printing press. BRANCH : We branch now into various evolutions upon this new religion – faster innovation in the technologies of truth and falsehood. Branch 1 – Jewish Then the second wave: Popperian philsophy, Misesian Economics, Randian/Rothbardian Libertinism. (the half-failure/half-success) Then the third wave: straussian neo-conservativsm and expansionary militarism of the ‘new rome’. (the madness of power) Branch 2 – Neo Puritan Then the adoption of Keyneisan Economics as the new innumerate pseudoscience. and Rawlsian Ethics as the pseudo morality. Then the adoption of postmodern philosophy in academia. THE FAILED REACTION Mises in economics, Brouwer in Mathematics, Bridgman in Physics (science), Popper in philosophy, A HOST of authors in Law. And a total catastrophic absence in Politics since majoritarianism was still influential everywhere. RESTORATION: Science catches up with the deceit and starts to disprove it. The various cognitive scientists, and neurologists, are largely responsible for our reframing of jewish monopoly conformity to western distribution of talents and abilities. EO Wilson states that a synthesis of biology, morality, politics and economics – all the sciences – should be possible. Archaeologists and historians and evolutionary biologists in our social orders. Haidt, the empirical psychologists, and the anthropologists in the evolution of cooperation. SYNTHESIS Doolittle in Economics, Politics, Ethics, Sociology, Psychology, Epistemology and Metaphysics. In retrospect this is my view of the evolution of history as a competition between the different european tribes, most of which practice morality and one of which practices immorality. And the reason being that if we hold land we can construct moral rules because we must in order to create the commons of land holding. A parasitic people that does not need or cannot hold land need not create commons because they can use the host’s. THE CENTRAL SUBJECT OF OUR DISCOURSE MUST BE THE COMMONS NOT THE INDIVIDUAL. Law is for individuals. Individuals must be able to act in their interests, limited by the prohibition on parasitism. But policy must exist for the production of commons that perpetuates the family, kin, tribe, and nation, or else it is just a lie to justify conquest. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Family Institution…

    [W]ithout the family we create great incentive for defectors, and we increase vastly the cost of individual housing, insurance, and sustenance and survival, That’s all. Marriage makes people wealthier by lowering costs, and creating a higher barrier to reproduction that prevents the underclasses from reproductive parasitism. So it is less important that our BEST breed a LOT, than it is for our worst not to breed even a little. IT IS LESS IMPORTANT FOR OUR BEST TO BREED A LOT THAN IT IS FOR OUR WORST NOT TO BREED EVEN A LITTLE

  • The Family Institution…

    [W]ithout the family we create great incentive for defectors, and we increase vastly the cost of individual housing, insurance, and sustenance and survival, That’s all. Marriage makes people wealthier by lowering costs, and creating a higher barrier to reproduction that prevents the underclasses from reproductive parasitism. So it is less important that our BEST breed a LOT, than it is for our worst not to breed even a little. IT IS LESS IMPORTANT FOR OUR BEST TO BREED A LOT THAN IT IS FOR OUR WORST NOT TO BREED EVEN A LITTLE

  • Continental -> Postmodern Philosophy -vs- Analytic -> Testimonial Philosophy

    ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY -> POSTMODERN -> TESTIMONIAL PHILOSOPHY [Y]ou see all these damned lists I make? All these definitions I write? How I walk through long sequences of reasoning? How I’m pedantic about what information is present, and what operation alters what information? How I place great burden on your ability to maintain a chain of reasoning, instead of giving you shortcuts that rely upon what we call ‘meaning’ – existing analogies in your memory? This category of philosophy is called ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY. Now technically analytic philosophy only requires set comparisons so that statements are internally testable, and non-contradictory. In other words “Does this appear to be true, and from the information stated in the words, can I say this is false?” Analytic philosophy attempts to incorporate scientific knowledge and their goal was to raise philosophy to a science – they failed. But analytic philosophy does not attempt to require basic research into creating sets of data. So analytic philosophy is extremely useful in the analysis and criticism of probabilistic data created in the age of probability and statistics. But it is not in and of itself useful for the solution of problems. There is nothing new therein. But TESTIMONIAL PHILOSOPHY (what I write) additionally more burdensome because it requires I make sequences of testable statements constructed out of operations, taking as few liberties as possible, so that we do not get to ‘fudge’ using ‘fluffy’ or ‘obscurantist’ language. I have categorized myself as an analytic philosopher, since the term post-analytic philosophy refers to postmodern philosophy – lying. But I am settling on Testimonial Philosophy as term that separates Modern Philosophy (‘meaningful’ post-mysticism), continental (rationalisms), analytic (testable statements), postmodern (‘deception’), and Testimonial (scientifically complete using all dimensions of criticism.) Religious philosophy takes very little scientific knowledge – if any. we can say it might even be a detriment. Continental philosophy requires only that we do not rely upon mysticism or the supernatural, only that what we say is meaningful, and possibly useful. It’s a philosophy of analogy and meaning. Post analytic philosophy takes this idea further by replacing the supernatural that was created by the divine, and saying we can create the supernatural by choice and repetition: the social construction of truth. Analytic philosophy attempts to convert philosophy into a science in the hope that we can something about the world from our statements and words. But while we can test for falsehood with analytic language, we cannot divine from our words what we do not already know when we make use of them. Testimonial philosophy attempts to unite all disciplines into a single language constructed only out of truthful statements that have survived criticism by all dimensions. Truth is what survives total criticism whether we desire it or not. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Continental -> Postmodern Philosophy -vs- Analytic -> Testimonial Philosophy

    ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY -> POSTMODERN -> TESTIMONIAL PHILOSOPHY [Y]ou see all these damned lists I make? All these definitions I write? How I walk through long sequences of reasoning? How I’m pedantic about what information is present, and what operation alters what information? How I place great burden on your ability to maintain a chain of reasoning, instead of giving you shortcuts that rely upon what we call ‘meaning’ – existing analogies in your memory? This category of philosophy is called ANALYTIC PHILOSOPHY. Now technically analytic philosophy only requires set comparisons so that statements are internally testable, and non-contradictory. In other words “Does this appear to be true, and from the information stated in the words, can I say this is false?” Analytic philosophy attempts to incorporate scientific knowledge and their goal was to raise philosophy to a science – they failed. But analytic philosophy does not attempt to require basic research into creating sets of data. So analytic philosophy is extremely useful in the analysis and criticism of probabilistic data created in the age of probability and statistics. But it is not in and of itself useful for the solution of problems. There is nothing new therein. But TESTIMONIAL PHILOSOPHY (what I write) additionally more burdensome because it requires I make sequences of testable statements constructed out of operations, taking as few liberties as possible, so that we do not get to ‘fudge’ using ‘fluffy’ or ‘obscurantist’ language. I have categorized myself as an analytic philosopher, since the term post-analytic philosophy refers to postmodern philosophy – lying. But I am settling on Testimonial Philosophy as term that separates Modern Philosophy (‘meaningful’ post-mysticism), continental (rationalisms), analytic (testable statements), postmodern (‘deception’), and Testimonial (scientifically complete using all dimensions of criticism.) Religious philosophy takes very little scientific knowledge – if any. we can say it might even be a detriment. Continental philosophy requires only that we do not rely upon mysticism or the supernatural, only that what we say is meaningful, and possibly useful. It’s a philosophy of analogy and meaning. Post analytic philosophy takes this idea further by replacing the supernatural that was created by the divine, and saying we can create the supernatural by choice and repetition: the social construction of truth. Analytic philosophy attempts to convert philosophy into a science in the hope that we can something about the world from our statements and words. But while we can test for falsehood with analytic language, we cannot divine from our words what we do not already know when we make use of them. Testimonial philosophy attempts to unite all disciplines into a single language constructed only out of truthful statements that have survived criticism by all dimensions. Truth is what survives total criticism whether we desire it or not. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • There is a Reasong for Interpetive Differences in Religion

    [T]he need for interpretation is evidence of the fallacy of a statement.

    —” find it very hard to believe that you will enable you to quickly and accurately interpret the Qu’ran when there appears to be much disagreement even within adherents to the religion”—

    That’s because no amount of study will achieve anything other than self indoctrination and hypnosis into a series of internally inconsistent falsehoods. Truth is non-contradictory. Thats' how we know truth. falsehood is contradictory. That's how we know falsehood. The fact that the koran requires ‘interpretation’ because it is internally consistent, is demonstration of the fact that it is falsehood. This is one of the great ways in which falsehoods are spread. “there is great wisdom here’. Then you have to just assume so many falsehoods but never reach the truth. The reason is that there was never any truth. The entire purpose was to get you to believe a series of falsehoods by the promise of future truth. This is the secret to all religious lies. The promise of eternal life is the same. If you believe all these falsehoods, then you will find immorality. The promise of heaven is the same: if you believe all these falsehoods then you will find heaven. The promise of reward: if you believe all these falsehoods then you will find virgins awaiting you. The lie of the devil to faust and the lie of muhammed to muslims: “I will give you stuff now if you give me something later” (faust). “I will give you something later if you give me something now” (allah). Whereas the entire purpose is to use you as a useful idiot to achieve immoral ends, and never pay you the reward you have been promised, because it does not exist and never did. There are no gods that are not just stories. There are no heavens that are not just false promises. There is no good in islam. The gnostics were right. Jehova was the devil and the Talmud, The Bible, and the Koran are his most successful works. There is only one prophet who does not lie. His name is Aristotle. And the one true god is truth itself.

  • There is a Reasong for Interpetive Differences in Religion

    [T]he need for interpretation is evidence of the fallacy of a statement.

    —” find it very hard to believe that you will enable you to quickly and accurately interpret the Qu’ran when there appears to be much disagreement even within adherents to the religion”—

    That’s because no amount of study will achieve anything other than self indoctrination and hypnosis into a series of internally inconsistent falsehoods. Truth is non-contradictory. Thats' how we know truth. falsehood is contradictory. That's how we know falsehood. The fact that the koran requires ‘interpretation’ because it is internally consistent, is demonstration of the fact that it is falsehood. This is one of the great ways in which falsehoods are spread. “there is great wisdom here’. Then you have to just assume so many falsehoods but never reach the truth. The reason is that there was never any truth. The entire purpose was to get you to believe a series of falsehoods by the promise of future truth. This is the secret to all religious lies. The promise of eternal life is the same. If you believe all these falsehoods, then you will find immorality. The promise of heaven is the same: if you believe all these falsehoods then you will find heaven. The promise of reward: if you believe all these falsehoods then you will find virgins awaiting you. The lie of the devil to faust and the lie of muhammed to muslims: “I will give you stuff now if you give me something later” (faust). “I will give you something later if you give me something now” (allah). Whereas the entire purpose is to use you as a useful idiot to achieve immoral ends, and never pay you the reward you have been promised, because it does not exist and never did. There are no gods that are not just stories. There are no heavens that are not just false promises. There is no good in islam. The gnostics were right. Jehova was the devil and the Talmud, The Bible, and the Koran are his most successful works. There is only one prophet who does not lie. His name is Aristotle. And the one true god is truth itself.

  • OPINION HAS NO IMPACT ON TRUTH. we use the words ‘true’ or ‘true for me’ incorre

    OPINION HAS NO IMPACT ON TRUTH.

    we use the words ‘true’ or ‘true for me’ incorrectly.

    I believe something sufficiently for action. That is belief. It is not truth.

    If it’s true regardless of what you believe, such that it cannot be false, that is truth.

    ***”Mass opinion creates mass opinion. the Laws of the universe, logic, mathematics, and human behavior do not care for mass opinion. Truth is truth. Opinion is opinion. preference is preference. hallucination is hallucination. lie is lie. Using the word truth to describe anything but truth is either error, wishful thinking, or lie.”***

    -curt

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 11:02:00 UTC

  • ISLAM AS INFANTILIZATION OF THE HUMAN MIND —–He proceeds to “list a few of th

    ISLAM AS INFANTILIZATION OF THE HUMAN MIND

    —–He proceeds to “list a few of their habits which Arabs are known for.” His subheadings include: “A lack of privacy for other’s space,” “Childish behavior,” “Stealing shoes,” “Etiquettes when eating,” “Getting angry” “Sleeping habits,” “The staring competition,” “Treating animals badly,” “Beggars,” “Driving ‘skills’,” and “Empty words.” —-

    Damn. Thats it you know. It’s not just ignorance but infantilization as the result of imposed ignorance.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 09:16:00 UTC