Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • TECH’S DARK SECRET – FOUNDERS AREN”T NORMAL PEOPLE –“A recent study by Dr. Mich

    TECH’S DARK SECRET – FOUNDERS AREN”T NORMAL PEOPLE

    –“A recent study by Dr. Michael Freeman, a clinical professor at UCSF and an entrepreneur as well, was one of the first of its kind to link higher rates of mental health issues to entrepreneurship.

    “Of the 242 entrepreneurs surveyed, 49% reported having a mental-health condition. Depression was the No. 1 reported condition among them and was present in 30% of all entrepreneurs, followed by ADHD (29%) and anxiety problems (27%). That’s a much higher percentage than the US population at large, where only about 7% identify as depressed.

    “More surprising was the incidence of mental health in the families of entrepreneurs: 72% said they either had mental-health problems themselves or in their immediate family.

    “A founder who has no history of mental illness from a family with no history either “is the exception, not the rule,” Freeman said.”–

    http://www.michaelafreemanmd.com/Research_files/Are%20Entrepreneurs%20Touched%20with%20Fire%20(pre-pub%20n)%204-17-15.pdf

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 15:51:00 UTC

  • “Torture is ineffective and counter-productive. But personally, I find it cathar

    —“Torture is ineffective and counter-productive. But personally, I find it cathartic.”—

    lolz

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 15:04:00 UTC

  • “But my experience is that language, like traditions, and genes, grows to contai

    —“But my experience is that language, like traditions, and genes, grows to contain useful, useless, and damaging content.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 15:03:00 UTC

  • CAN THE TRUTH BE A COMMONS? (Interesting) —“Truth telling is commons, but trut

    CAN THE TRUTH BE A COMMONS? (Interesting)

    —“Truth telling is commons, but truth is not commons?”—

    Let me state this clearly:

    “The act of habituating truth-telling as both a normative behavior and skill is an expensive normative commons (asset) for a population to construct.”

    How does truth telling exist?

    The commons of truth telling exists as both demonstrated habit, and in the institutional means for its inter-temporal and intergenerational persistence: testimony, jury and law.

    How does truth exist?

    I put it this way: that information can be treated as a commons, and we can protect the informational commons just as we do every other commons both physical and normative.

    So when we propose the statement ‘is the truth a commons?’ we are stuck with whether can we treat the truth as a commons.

    That requires we define truth, which as far as I know, can consist only of the extant history of truthfully constructed statements. If we protected those statements, then that’s not logical. Because we do not in fact know whether they are true, only that they are truthfully constructed.

    So our only choice then is to require that only truthful statements enter into the commons, and then let the best surviving statements rise and the lesser fall. Just as we require only non-harmful products enter into the market for goods and services and allow them to rise and fall.

    There is no truth that can exist as a commons. There can exist only truthfully constructed statements. And we cannot protect those statements since it’s counter-productive. We can only prohibit ‘polluting’ them like all other commons.

    Cheers.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 14:58:00 UTC

  • Tautology. Determinism is a necessary metaphysical assumption

    Tautology. Determinism is a necessary metaphysical assumption.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 13:40:05 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616239854863650816

    Reply addressees: @a_man_in_black @narmno @the_new_heresy

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/615916788828672001

    IN REPLY TO:

    @a_man_in_black

    @narmno @the_new_heresy @curtdoolittle However, science does not identify truth; only our best understanding of consistent processes.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/615916788828672001

  • Operationalism is a Means of Falsification

     [A] criticism from Bruce, on my failure to make clear that Operationalism is a means of conducting a test of falsification.

    –“This monotheistic passion for reduction to operations seems to lead to cul-de-sacs.”— Bruce Caithness

    Bruce,

    1) Operationalism is an attempt at falsification. Just as in math, if we can construct a statement through operations then it is existentially possible. Just as in economics, if we can reduce an economic statement to a sequence of rationally executable decisions. Just as in science, if we can reduce a test to a repeatable sequence of operations, and if we can reduce our measures to those that are possible then the test is existentially possible, assuming determinism in the universe and therefore the constancy of that which we measure (without which no science ,and no theory, can be possible).

    If I conduct tests of identity, internal consistency, external correspondence, repeatability, full accounting, parsimony (limits), existential possibility, objective morality (voluntary transfer), then I have laundered imaginary content from my statements. This is what science consists in: identifying existential information and eliminating imaginary information.

    If I have performed the due diligence to launder by speech of imaginary information, then I speak as truthfully as is possible. I may indeed speak the most parsimonious testimony possible (the truth) or I may not – a matter of error at one end of the possibilities, or of imprecision at the other end.

    I can warranty that I have performed that due diligence by stating that I speak truthfully: I give testimony in public, as to the truthfulness of my speech.

     

    2) One can speak truthfully, and warranty that one speaks truthfully. If one speaks in e-prime (specifying means of existence), and in operational definitions (rather than experiences), it is extremely difficult to articulate an idea that still contains imaginary content.

     

    3) Rather than “leading to cul-de-sac’s” I suspect that this is the completion (or repair) of the critical rationalist research program and the most important invention in philosophy since the failure of that program.

    Just is what it is. I just did a good yeoman’s labor. But between explanatory power, and parsimony it’s a pretty powerful theoretical structure, and it’s pretty hard to defeat it.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • Operationalism is a Means of Falsification

     [A] criticism from Bruce, on my failure to make clear that Operationalism is a means of conducting a test of falsification.

    –“This monotheistic passion for reduction to operations seems to lead to cul-de-sacs.”— Bruce Caithness

    Bruce,

    1) Operationalism is an attempt at falsification. Just as in math, if we can construct a statement through operations then it is existentially possible. Just as in economics, if we can reduce an economic statement to a sequence of rationally executable decisions. Just as in science, if we can reduce a test to a repeatable sequence of operations, and if we can reduce our measures to those that are possible then the test is existentially possible, assuming determinism in the universe and therefore the constancy of that which we measure (without which no science ,and no theory, can be possible).

    If I conduct tests of identity, internal consistency, external correspondence, repeatability, full accounting, parsimony (limits), existential possibility, objective morality (voluntary transfer), then I have laundered imaginary content from my statements. This is what science consists in: identifying existential information and eliminating imaginary information.

    If I have performed the due diligence to launder by speech of imaginary information, then I speak as truthfully as is possible. I may indeed speak the most parsimonious testimony possible (the truth) or I may not – a matter of error at one end of the possibilities, or of imprecision at the other end.

    I can warranty that I have performed that due diligence by stating that I speak truthfully: I give testimony in public, as to the truthfulness of my speech.

     

    2) One can speak truthfully, and warranty that one speaks truthfully. If one speaks in e-prime (specifying means of existence), and in operational definitions (rather than experiences), it is extremely difficult to articulate an idea that still contains imaginary content.

     

    3) Rather than “leading to cul-de-sac’s” I suspect that this is the completion (or repair) of the critical rationalist research program and the most important invention in philosophy since the failure of that program.

    Just is what it is. I just did a good yeoman’s labor. But between explanatory power, and parsimony it’s a pretty powerful theoretical structure, and it’s pretty hard to defeat it.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute
    Kiev, Ukraine

  • I miss my crew. Kirill Latysh Vitalii Maslianok Alexey Riabokon Александр Марцен

    I miss my crew.

    Kirill Latysh Vitalii Maslianok Alexey Riabokon Александр Марценюк Victoria Maslianok Мариям Вокалисткa, Yanna Latish.

    Hope you are having a good vacation. 🙂 -hugs.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 12:15:00 UTC

  • AMERICAN WEALTH (from elsewhere) American prosperity is determined by the follow

    AMERICAN WEALTH

    (from elsewhere)

    American prosperity is determined by the following:

    1) the anglo-german proclivity for paying the high personal cost of truth-telling in all walks of life – it is the greatest tax we pay. It is also unique in the world. if you aren’t germanic, or at least northern European, you’re probably irreparably corrupt and a liar and you don’t even realize it.

    2) the anglo common law which rapidly adapts to new forms of parasitism as quickly as they are invented.

    3) the anglo (non-continental) common law bias, such that we permit everything and resolve conflicts later in court, vs the continental bias that requires approval from some authority in advance in order to prevent conflicts in court.

    4) Prior to 1963, the requirement for membership in the absolute nuclear family prior to engaging in reproduction.

    5) The sale of a new continent to new homeowners using fiat credit.

    6) The sale of consumer goods to homeowners previously incapable of home ownership.

    7) The USA’s use of it’s inherited British empire (navy and bases) to set terms of international finance and trade.

    8) The stock market which creates a lottery effect for innovators.

    9) It’s stable currency

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 12:10:00 UTC

  • “I’m a libertarian: an advocate for aristocratic liberty: the elimination of dem

    –“I’m a libertarian: an advocate for aristocratic liberty: the elimination of demand for authority by the total prohibition on parasitism and free riding. Anarchy and liberty and nomocracy are synonyms. But Rothbardian libertinism is not logically or empirically a means for eliminating the state. It’s a means of increasing demand for it.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 11:59:00 UTC