Author: Curt Doolittle

  • Q&A: WTF ARE YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT? 😉 —“I have to ask… what the actual FUC

    Q&A: WTF ARE YOU GUYS TALKING ABOUT? 😉

    —“I have to ask… what the actual FUCK are you guys talking about? From the outside this all reads like complete and utter nonsense — but each of you seem convinced that what you are speaking to is real, and concrete. Help a brother out.”—-Michael V. Coppola

    It’s not nonsense really. Its actually a profoundly important argument.

    WHY?

    Leftists rely on loading(adding emotional content), framing(selective presentation of argument) and overloading (repetition and propaganda), to advance their agenda with pseudoscience, misrepresentation, and outright lying, and to resist criticism by rallying and shaming (what we call political correctness).

    What the other guys are arguing is that without government, media, and academy (“the Cathedral Complex”) they can use the same techniques to ‘inspire’ a competing alternative religion. And second, that I should adopt this strategy in my work.

    Now my work is the merger of science and philosophy into what I call Testimonialism (an extension of the scientific method), and Propertarianism (an extension of property rights, rule of law, and classical government), and what I have done is created an amoral (which means objective and emotionless) language and logic that does not require we rely upon introspection to determine if something is truly objectively moral or not.

    I want to make it very difficult to lie in public when discussing the production of commons (politics). They want to preserve this dishonest form of argument because they feel the heroic tradition is not enough to inspire people (despite the evidence of its persistence across millennia).

    They are advocating that I do the opposite. which defeats the entire purpose of my work: creating an environment as saturated with truth, as the post-christian era was saturated with reason, and the current era is saturated with physical science. I want to restore the high trust society, restore us to truthful discourse, and make it impossible for parasites to compete and survive within our society.

    Now, normally I would see this argument as silly but I have a long standing policy of defeating attackers completely, and it’s a great opportunity to discuss this problem with people who are highly invested (ON THE RIGHT) but who want to continue to make use of the tools that enabled THE LEFT.

    That’s basically it.

    Thanks for asking.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:53:00 UTC

  • (Worth Repeating) —-“There is a reason the strong can speak their minds honest

    (Worth Repeating)

    —-“There is a reason the strong can speak their minds honestly and truthfully: only the weak need do otherwise.”—-


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:37:00 UTC

  • NIETZSCHE, EVOLUTION, AND TRUTH (reposted) My understanding is that Nietzsche cl

    NIETZSCHE, EVOLUTION, AND TRUTH

    (reposted)

    My understanding is that Nietzsche claimed, that by Darwin’s removing the exterior causes for the evolution of man, that what he calls ‘will to power’ was sufficient to produce man (or all similar animals) through the process of evolution.

    Now, today we might use different terminology. I use ‘acquisition’ and ‘pacification’ and eschew ‘power’ since it appears from the evidence that it’s the acquisition of a portfolio of experiences and opportunities for experience that people desire and act in favor of – chief of which is status.

    I think we might also argue that mere entropy causes our development, even if circumstances (a peaceful enough oven in which to cook advanced life) are extremely rare, the universe has many opportunities to try. So as such our will to power is merely a set of chemical responses that we evolved in order to defeat entropy.

    So in effect I agree but eschew reliance on Nietzsche’s effeminate psychologizing and german conflation, loading and framing.

    Further, since psychologizing and psychology evolved as tools of feminine gossip and critique, I avoid them. I have the courage to use truth, rather than depend upon intellectual crutches.

    Using psychological explanations is a display of feminine strategies. Which is useful for the weak. But unnecessary for the strong.

    Truth is enough. Incentives are enough. Psychologizing is merely an attempt to engage in gossip using the strategy of women who do so because they are demonstrably weaker.

    I don’t know if I want power. I want to demonstrate I am simply superior. Power just means more work to do. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:35:00 UTC

  • Slayer of false gods, false promises, pseudoscience, shoddy argument, and justif

    Slayer of false gods, false promises, pseudoscience, shoddy argument, and justification of priors.

    Sigh.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:07:00 UTC

  • The way you distance yourself from accusations of bias is to offend everyone equ

    The way you distance yourself from accusations of bias is to offend everyone equally. 😉

    Workin’ on it. 😉


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:06:00 UTC

  • Democrats vs Liberals: Democrats are low IQ people who vote for free stuff. Libe

    Democrats vs Liberals:

    Democrats are low IQ people who vote for free stuff.

    Liberals are high IQ people who use free stuff to win votes.

    qotd: Shaun Moss


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 13:06:00 UTC

  • (Kant’s grandfather was a Scot? Named “Cand”? No wonder he was a little person.

    (Kant’s grandfather was a Scot? Named “Cand”? No wonder he was a little person. Celtic genes?)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 11:02:00 UTC

  • TRANSCENDENCE We transcended the limits of intuition with the invention of Reaso

    TRANSCENDENCE

    We transcended the limits of intuition with the invention of Reason in Greece.

    They pulled us back into morality.

    We transcended perception with mathematics and geometry

    They pulled us back into astrology.

    We transcended morality with Roman law.

    But the Byzantines pulled us back into mysticism.

    We transcended mysticism with British science and economics.

    But the French and Germans drew us back into rationalism

    We transcended religious language with industrial science and Darwin.

    But the cosmopolitans drew us back into pseudoscience.

    We transcended the limits of perception with relativity, macro economics, computability.

    But the postmoderns and feminists resorted to propaganda, shaming and lying.

    We transcended pseudoscience with genetics and cognitive science.

    Truth, science law are enough to transcend us from their mysticism, rationalism, pseudoscience, propaganda and outright lying.

    There are no discounts on excellence. There is no cheap trick. No cheat. No cunning. No witticism. No deceit.

    The only perfection is truth itself.

    And the only means of discovering truth is that method of laundering error bias wishful thinking and deceit from our words and thoughts and memories.

    Only gods have no fear.

    Therefore only gods can know the truth.

    The truth is not comforting

    The truth is empowering.

    It is truth that makes men gods.

    It is godliness that makes us truthful.

    Only cowards and the weak fear truth.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 08:49:00 UTC

  • THE TRUTH IS ENOUGH – UNLESS YOU ARE TOO WEAK TO WIELD IT. The truth is enough t

    THE TRUTH IS ENOUGH – UNLESS YOU ARE TOO WEAK TO WIELD IT.

    The truth is enough to restore the west. If the truth is not enough for you then you are too weak to wield it. If you are too weak to wield truth, then you are too weak to lead. And if too weak to lead then have the good sense to follow.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 08:08:00 UTC

  • WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH? ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson ) It’s no

    WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH?

    ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson )

    It’s not that I don’t understand. Its that I have failed as yet to help you understand. And while I may continue to fail, but I will try until I am at least comfortable, that I can do no better at trying.

    ARGUMENT:

    Militia, Heroism, Sovereignty, Jury, Truthfulness, Science, Sanctity of Nature, have produced the common interest, high trust, competitive excellence, and economic velocity that made western man surpass competitors in both the ancient medieval and modern world..

    We can stack argumentative techniques by effectiveness of persuasion, largely because elites are copied by their followers, and the rest of the population is organized by those elites using law, commerce, and moral speech.

    1 – Sentimental Expression (justification of moral and reproductive biases)

    2 – Mythical analogy (justification)

    3 – Moral/Religious Argument (justification)

    4 – Rational argument (justification)

    5 – Historical analogy (justification)

    6 – Economic (correlative) argument.

    7 – Empirical (causal argument – criticism)

    8 – Existentially Descriptive (scientific and truthful argument – criticism)

    Each of these maps roughly to a difference of a half standard deviation in IQ. With the upper classes that organize society (re: Pareto – the upper 20%, led by the upper 1%) utilizing the highest means of argument and the lower classes using the lower forms of argument.

    The lower classes are DIRECTED, they are not themselves capable of leadership. So they require we USE the lower forms of argument in inciting them to ACTION, but we do not organize the upper classes by sentiment, we organize them by their means of argument – almost all of which is empirical.

    So psychology is used by ideology in order to inspire the lower classes to action. While facts are used by the upper classes to determine the means of organizing and reorganizing the lower classes through law and violence, moral speech and gossip, and material incentive.

    But upper (meaning middle, upper middle, and elites) classes merely USE the lower classes by giving them inspirations caused by incentives.

    That does not mean that the upper classes rely upon the same arguments. It means they tell narratives, myths and fantasies to the lower classes in order to inspire them.

    The problem is not in inspiring the lower classes. The problem is in developing a means by which to enact and sustain a change in the status quo.

    So those things that inspire people being to the discipline of preferences – aesthetics. They do not belong to epistemology, ethics, politics. Those are domains of TRUTH independent of our preferences. Aesthetics is the discipline in which we USE truth and psychology together to achieve PREFERRED ends.

    NET: if we eliminate by violence (law) deceitful methods, we are left with truthful methods only available to us. We can create religions but they cannot be constructed of lies. WE can create ideologies, but they cannot be falsely constructed.

    I think truth is enough. It demonstrably has been.

    REVERSAL

    Conversely, if a man is not capable of motivation to transcendence by the truth, then how is he not incapable of transcendence if he fears the truth and requires untruth?

    In other words: by stating that truth is not enough, you say you are already sub-human, and in need of dominance by your betters.

    SO I UNDERSTAND

    I understand that the lower classes need to be led by inspiration. I also understand that transcendence – to leave the subhumans behind, requires that we abandon comforting lies that exist to assuage our weaknesses.

    If truth is not enough for you, then you cannot transcend and become fully human, and in doing so, become a god.

    Instead, one is just another weak woman at the mercy of chemistry she cannot master, or an impulsive imbeclile who lives in fear of the universe.

    So you see, I see your form of arguments as weakness. Not of strength. Of cowardice, not of heroism. Not of intelligence but of animal impulse. Not of truth, but of justification for failure.

    Religions are for the majority peasantry. Cults are for the minority who are desperate. Truth is enough for aristocracy because they have the courage to confront and dominate a hostile universe that has no interest in man or his joys, but which seeks to end him. Truth is enough for ruling the peasantry. Truth is enough for transcendence. Truth is enough for aristocracy. Truth is enough for gods. Because that is what gods are: omniscient and omnipotent.

    THE END OF THE ARGUMENT

    As far as I know you cannot exit this argument except to admit that you are weak.

    If you choose to abandon your weakness, and have the courage then I welcome your advice and counsel. If you remain a coward, hiding behind germanic attempts to restate Christianity in pagan language, or to restate paganism in christian language, then I think you are not really worthy of my time and effort.

    I spend time on people to make bets. Very few bets pay. I need only a handful that do. Every other man who follows will do so out of incentives not necessarily understanding. And that is the domain of elites: rule.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian institute,

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 07:39:00 UTC