Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • “Formally, then, Popper’s theory of demarcation may be articulated as follows: w

    —“Formally, then, Popper’s theory of demarcation may be articulated as follows: where a ‘basic statement’ is to be understood as a particular observation-report, then we may say that a theory is scientific if and only if it divides the class of basic statements into the following two non-empty sub-classes: (a) the class of all those basic statements with which it is inconsistent, or which it prohibits—this is the class of its potential falsifiers (i.e., those statements which, if true, falsify the whole theory), and (b) the class of those basic statements with which it is consistent, or which it permits (i.e., those statements which, if true, corroborate it, or bear it out).”—

    PROPERTARIANISM’S POSITION:

    Since science ( the academy in general) is a luxury good, insulated from opportunity costs, insulated from market forces, assumedly unbiased, and assumedly free of use in the political sphere as a means of coercion or profiteering or conquest – and prior to the present, assumed to not need to provide warranty on their work products – Popper’s articulation of demarcation is incorrect, because it is insufficient for use as a general rule and grants particular sanctions to scientists that the 20th century has proven, if not the entire american experiment – that we may not do.

    There exists only truthful and untruthful speech, and the speaker’s warranty that speech is truthful, by demonstrating the diligence of internal consistency, external correspondence, falsification, and finally existentially demonstrating that it is free of imaginary, erroneous, biased, and deceptive content.

    (Under this principle, we could have prosecuted the Frankfurt school for the fabrication of their evidence.)

    Free speech requires warranty an operationalism is the only warranty possible for theories.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 22:01:00 UTC

  • “Every genuine scientific theory then, in Popper’s view, is prohibitive, in the

    —“Every genuine scientific theory then, in Popper’s view, is prohibitive, in the sense that it forbids, by implication, particular events or occurrences. As such it can be tested and falsified, but never logically verified. Thus Popper stresses that it should not be inferred from the fact that a theory has withstood the most rigorous testing, for however long a period of time, that it has been verified; rather we should recognise that such a theory has received a high measure of corroboration. and may be provisionally retained as the best available theory until it is finally falsified (if indeed it is ever falsified), and/or is superseded by a better theory.”—

    PROPERTARIAN POSITION

    An advocate of Propertarinaism would argue that since the distinction is between truthful and non-truthful speech, not between science and non-science, that the term ‘scientific’ is not relevant – merely a ‘more polite’ way of saying someone is not and cannot be speaking truthfully – and therefore is polluting the commons.

    Furthermore, Propertarianism would argue that all constraining improvements upon our theories are prohibitive in an effort to eliminate imaginary, erroneous, biased, and deceitful content. And that falsification is insufficient – in that it performs a warranty of correspondence, but fails to provide a warranty of possibility or truthfulness, by demonstrating that all content of the theory is existentially possible.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 21:50:00 UTC

  • “Popper accordingly repudiates induction and rejects the view that it is the cha

    —“Popper accordingly repudiates induction and rejects the view that it is the characteristic method of scientific investigation and inference, substituting falsifiability in its place.”—

    PROPERTARIAN POSITION

    The operationalists have corrected this view: how you imagine your theory is irrelevant – how you propose your theory and therefore testify to its construction is not. Or better: how you bring the product of your thought to the market requires that you warrantee it is non-fraudulent, and free of harm.

    Because scientists and academics and public intellectuals and priests have brought many harmful warrantied products to market – and unless such intellectual products are operationally constructed, one cannot demonstrate that he did not create a hazard by his actions.

    Popper confuses the process of guessing: tautology, deduction, induction, abduction, guessing, and intuitive association, about existential phenomenon – with axiomatic deduction and induction as practiced in the logic of constant relations (mathematics and sets).

    There are no logical constraints on the production of theories – we can imagine theories by any means we can possibly arrive at them. The only constraint we place upon theories is in the publication of them; because in the publication of them we must know that you have warrantied your speech from harm, just as you have warrantied a law, product, or service from harming others by your due diligence.

    We can test our theories through internal consistency (logic), external correspondence (testing), hardening (falsification), and operational definitions (proof of existence, the absence of imaginary information, the absence of cognitive bias, and the absence of allegorical deception.)

    Because theories in every theoretical discipline, just like products in any industry, are capable of causing harm. In fact, harmful theories are second only the the great plague in the harm done – and even that is open to challenge. In fact, it is most likely that harmful theories have produced the greatest disasters affecting man in history.

    Free speech, dueling, Libel, Defamation and Slander co-habitated well. One could stop lying himself, or via the courts. Each individual could defend against the spreading of deceit by his own action etther by physical threat or by threat of the courts. But with the incremental loss of dueling, libel, defamation, slander, we slowly lost the means of protecting ourselves from harmful gossip. Worse the academy began to adopt gossip systematically.

    There is no need to return to dueling. However, it is quite possible to prevent politicians, the academy, the press, businesses and private individuals from the spread of harmful, dishonest and erroneous theories.

    All that is required is that we grasp that there is nothing particular to science about the scientific method. It is just the method we must use if we wish to speak truthfully? whether a statement is internally consistent (logical), externally correspondent (tested), hardened (via falsification), and existentially possible (operationally defined).

    Why should we be able to distribute harmful theories any more than we can distribute harmful products, services, and policies?

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 21:47:00 UTC

  • “Popper holds that there is no unique methodology specific to science. Science,

    —“Popper holds that there is no unique methodology specific to science. Science, like virtually every other human, and indeed organic, activity, Popper believes, consists largely of problem-solving.”—

    All human activity consists of problem solving. The method of thinking, acting and speaking developed by scientists is merely the most truthful method of thinking, acting, and speaking man has developed. Empiricism (observation), instrumentalism, Operationalism, and performative truth constitute the most truthful means of thinking, acting and speaking we have come to understand. The reason being that empiricism, instrumentalism and operationalism require us to demonstrate existence proofs rather than mere tests of meaning. The point of demarcation then, is not between science and non-science, but between truthful speech and non-truthful speech. Where the criteria for truthful speech, is the promise of that any other observer of the same actions would experience the same measurements (results).

    Furthermore

    1) science is a luxury good. 2) there are fewer incentives to lie in the physical sciences precisely because it is a luxury good, and luxury goods reward us with status signals, not material things, 3) There is a very human need to explain – a fear of vacuum – and it is this vacuum that we try to fill, with untruthful thought action and speech. 4) But until we can construct truthful speech, we cannot make a truth proposition, only imagine hypotheses (4b) and our imaginations are guided by our genes: with biases we must seek to escape lest we cause harm to others. 5) Propertarianism them, demands of us an even higher standard than falsification. Propertarianism does not limit how we inquire into science, only what we can claim to say truthfully in any walk of life – including science. Just as falsification places a higher constraint on the scope of truthful propositions in science, Propertarianism further increases the constraint upon truthful propositions in science. It is an ethical mandate that man does not harm, as an explicit constraint upon the many scientists and philosophers that have done harm by pseudoscience and pseudo-rationalism: speaking untruthfully, and causing harm. 6) Propertarianism holds scientists and philosophers accountable for their public speech – and public actions – if not private thoughts, and demands that speakers warranty that they speak truthfully: Operationally. 7) Scientists, academics, public intellectuals and philosophers, in the 19th and 20th centuries, have struggled to restore mysticism using the one success that the academy can claim: physical science, and caused millions of deaths with their words, and destroyed our civilization. 8) if you are not willing to warranty that your speech is truthful, then you may be punished by the rest of us for the harm it has caused. 9) In order to prevent harm of the 19th and 20th centuries, we must create the moral standard, and embody that moral standard in law, that intellectual products brought to the market are no longer able to cause harm because they are either defective, or that they serve as vehicles for fraud – which is endemic to the cosmopolitan and anglo programs.

    usage: war.ran.ty. war·ran·tied, war·ran·ty·ing, war·ran·ties

    Implied warranty

    A warranty arising from the existence of certain laws governing the conditions under which a certain thing may be transferred, rather than from the words of the seller.

    Warranty of merchantability

    An implied guarantee on the part of a merchant that the merchandise he sells is suitable for the general purpose that it is sold. For example, if the merchant sells house paint, it is implied that that paint will adhere to walls.

    Warranty of diligence (proposed)

    An implied guarantee on the part of a producer of intellectual speech, that his works are limited to the demonstrably existential, and free of imaginary and deceptive content.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 21:22:00 UTC

  • On Ukraine and Prosperity – Liberty, Violence and Rule of Law

    [I]n the past two years the hryvnia has lost HALF of its value. Prices on everything are rising, while increases in employee compensation are not. All economies face this problem. Salaries are stickier than contracts, and contracts are stickier than prices, and prices are stickier than currency. So all changes in demand for currency around the world SLOWLY work through the economy ‘unsticking’ one thing after another. And salaries are at two edged sword: employees expect them to go up when currency loses value, but employees do not expect them to go down when currency gains value. ON UKRAINE In our case we have two problems. One, that the dollar is getting more valuable in the world, and two, that the Hryvna is getting less valuable in the world. And our people pay the consequences.

    • We can only fix Ukraine’s problem with credit.
    • We can only obtain credit with legal certainty.
    • We can only obtain legal certainty with rule of law.
    • We can only possess rule of law with judges who obey rule of law.
    • We can only possess judges with the rule of law if we can replace our judges – and for that matter, the entire court staff.
    • We can only replace the judges and the court staff with someone to force them out.
    • We can only force them out if the police to act upon it.
    • We can only expect the police to act upon it if they are also uncorrupt and respect rule of law.
    • We can only have police who are uncorrupt and respect rule of law if we fire them all and re-hire them again with higher standards, higher pay, and higher punishment for corruption – it must be wiser to collect a pension than to accept a bribe of any size.
    • We can only trust that they will be punished and stay honest if we have courts that enforce it.
    • And we can only have courts that will enforce it if we have juries to override the judges.
    • And we can only juries to override the judges if we have people who will act honestly on juries.
    • We will only have people who act honestly on juries once enough Ukrainians understand that all of Ukraine depends upon them and only them:
    • (a) sit a jury and enforce the law, even against friends and family.
    • (b) speak the truth even if it leads to your loss, and require it of others, and punish them if they do not.
    • (c) replace the government by armed violence until all of the above are enacted.

    [T]he only freedom logically possible is that which is obtained by a militia at the point of a gun. Everything else is just benevolent permission – not liberty. Ether a people is able to act as a militia (a militia means every living able bodied male) to demand these things of their government, or they aren’t able to act as a militia to demand these things of their government – or replace their government if needed. You get the government you deserve. All people possess the government that they deserve. Because no government can sustain universal insurrection, because no economy can survive universal insurrection. Some of us are willing to earn the form government we HOPE to deserve by our actions. The rest simply GET the government that they do deserve by their inaction. We are not yet willing to have the government we work to deserve. Because we are not wiling to evict the entire judiciary and police force – and that is what is required. A government is by its nature corrupt. There is no exception in the world – because a government is a monopoly, and the incentives for individuals in a monopoly all favor corruption. This is why governments must remain small – it is harder to steal when it is harder to be anonymous. So keep the number of people who of necessity must be corrupt and will be corrupt – to a minimum. The people must control the government. But if the people are immoral, they will have an immoral and corrupt government. If the people are moral, then they will have a moral government even if the government’s members are of necessity corrupt in one way or another. But the hard economic facts make political corruption irrelevant – it is judicial and police corruption that prevent the expansion of consumer credit.  The corrupt economy may be large, but that does not affect the individual citizens who merely need CONSUMER CREDIT. The assumption that citizens make is that they could obtain the monies that are siphoned off personally by corrupt government employees wither in the Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian and asiatic models, or whether they are siphoned off systematically as in the american and european systems, as inflated salaries special benefits, special pensions, absurdly expensive offices, and expensive equipment, or privileges granted to loyal constituents, businesses, organizations and lobbyists. Government people will ALWAYS siphon unearned wealth (corruption). That is what they do. They have no competition other than the militia (armed citizenry) to stop them. [T]he WEST is just as corrupt as the east – it is just systematized into sophisticated corporeal corruption not private corruption. What differs is that in the west, the citizenry has rule of law and therefore credit. So they live well because of their own private sector economy – even though the public sector is just as corrupt everywhere else. Ukraine must evict and ban all sitting judges, clerks and administration from the courts, and all do the same for all police officers. The best choice would be to import a few hundred young German, Scandinavia, and English speaking judges to interview, hire, and manage replacement judges. This would immediately, within one year, change the european perspective on Ukraine and credit. Georgia has already shown us how to fix the police. The problem then is not politicians that prevent us from prosperity WE MUST SOLVE THE RIGHT PROBLEM. The problem that prevents us from prosperity is that we are solving the wrong problem. Politicians are all corrupt. Judges and police who are paid a decent salary are all we need in order to build a prosperous Ukraine. As always the politicians will seek to siphon it off for their own corrupt use just as they do in the west. Just as they do everywhere. Because politicians are by necessity agents of corruption – even when they dont’ intend to be. They have no means of measuring what is ‘right’ other than ‘what they can get away with’. A child has no means of measuring what is right and wrong without a parent. A business has no measure of whether they efficiently serve the world except if they do not do so at a loss. And a politician’s only measure is what corruption can he get away with without voters, judges, police, and competing politicians to stop him. Freedom is created by courts and a militia that demands them freedom and courts. Politicians are just entertainment – they figure out what to do with the profits that they can steal from the people. That’s what politicians do. Ukrainians have never had freedom. Feudal serfs, Soviet Serfs, and now post-soviet cattle to be farmed for the benefit of those in power – in the Russian and Asian model. But for the ordinary people to have profits they must have credit and for credit they must have rule of law. And to have rule of law – all able bodied men must take up arms to demand it. A credible threat alone is enough to force it to happen. SLAVA UKRAINI Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • On Ukraine and Prosperity – Liberty, Violence and Rule of Law

    [I]n the past two years the hryvnia has lost HALF of its value. Prices on everything are rising, while increases in employee compensation are not. All economies face this problem. Salaries are stickier than contracts, and contracts are stickier than prices, and prices are stickier than currency. So all changes in demand for currency around the world SLOWLY work through the economy ‘unsticking’ one thing after another. And salaries are at two edged sword: employees expect them to go up when currency loses value, but employees do not expect them to go down when currency gains value. ON UKRAINE In our case we have two problems. One, that the dollar is getting more valuable in the world, and two, that the Hryvna is getting less valuable in the world. And our people pay the consequences.

    • We can only fix Ukraine’s problem with credit.
    • We can only obtain credit with legal certainty.
    • We can only obtain legal certainty with rule of law.
    • We can only possess rule of law with judges who obey rule of law.
    • We can only possess judges with the rule of law if we can replace our judges – and for that matter, the entire court staff.
    • We can only replace the judges and the court staff with someone to force them out.
    • We can only force them out if the police to act upon it.
    • We can only expect the police to act upon it if they are also uncorrupt and respect rule of law.
    • We can only have police who are uncorrupt and respect rule of law if we fire them all and re-hire them again with higher standards, higher pay, and higher punishment for corruption – it must be wiser to collect a pension than to accept a bribe of any size.
    • We can only trust that they will be punished and stay honest if we have courts that enforce it.
    • And we can only have courts that will enforce it if we have juries to override the judges.
    • And we can only juries to override the judges if we have people who will act honestly on juries.
    • We will only have people who act honestly on juries once enough Ukrainians understand that all of Ukraine depends upon them and only them:
    • (a) sit a jury and enforce the law, even against friends and family.
    • (b) speak the truth even if it leads to your loss, and require it of others, and punish them if they do not.
    • (c) replace the government by armed violence until all of the above are enacted.

    [T]he only freedom logically possible is that which is obtained by a militia at the point of a gun. Everything else is just benevolent permission – not liberty. Ether a people is able to act as a militia (a militia means every living able bodied male) to demand these things of their government, or they aren’t able to act as a militia to demand these things of their government – or replace their government if needed. You get the government you deserve. All people possess the government that they deserve. Because no government can sustain universal insurrection, because no economy can survive universal insurrection. Some of us are willing to earn the form government we HOPE to deserve by our actions. The rest simply GET the government that they do deserve by their inaction. We are not yet willing to have the government we work to deserve. Because we are not wiling to evict the entire judiciary and police force – and that is what is required. A government is by its nature corrupt. There is no exception in the world – because a government is a monopoly, and the incentives for individuals in a monopoly all favor corruption. This is why governments must remain small – it is harder to steal when it is harder to be anonymous. So keep the number of people who of necessity must be corrupt and will be corrupt – to a minimum. The people must control the government. But if the people are immoral, they will have an immoral and corrupt government. If the people are moral, then they will have a moral government even if the government’s members are of necessity corrupt in one way or another. But the hard economic facts make political corruption irrelevant – it is judicial and police corruption that prevent the expansion of consumer credit.  The corrupt economy may be large, but that does not affect the individual citizens who merely need CONSUMER CREDIT. The assumption that citizens make is that they could obtain the monies that are siphoned off personally by corrupt government employees wither in the Russian, Ukrainian, Belorussian and asiatic models, or whether they are siphoned off systematically as in the american and european systems, as inflated salaries special benefits, special pensions, absurdly expensive offices, and expensive equipment, or privileges granted to loyal constituents, businesses, organizations and lobbyists. Government people will ALWAYS siphon unearned wealth (corruption). That is what they do. They have no competition other than the militia (armed citizenry) to stop them. [T]he WEST is just as corrupt as the east – it is just systematized into sophisticated corporeal corruption not private corruption. What differs is that in the west, the citizenry has rule of law and therefore credit. So they live well because of their own private sector economy – even though the public sector is just as corrupt everywhere else. Ukraine must evict and ban all sitting judges, clerks and administration from the courts, and all do the same for all police officers. The best choice would be to import a few hundred young German, Scandinavia, and English speaking judges to interview, hire, and manage replacement judges. This would immediately, within one year, change the european perspective on Ukraine and credit. Georgia has already shown us how to fix the police. The problem then is not politicians that prevent us from prosperity WE MUST SOLVE THE RIGHT PROBLEM. The problem that prevents us from prosperity is that we are solving the wrong problem. Politicians are all corrupt. Judges and police who are paid a decent salary are all we need in order to build a prosperous Ukraine. As always the politicians will seek to siphon it off for their own corrupt use just as they do in the west. Just as they do everywhere. Because politicians are by necessity agents of corruption – even when they dont’ intend to be. They have no means of measuring what is ‘right’ other than ‘what they can get away with’. A child has no means of measuring what is right and wrong without a parent. A business has no measure of whether they efficiently serve the world except if they do not do so at a loss. And a politician’s only measure is what corruption can he get away with without voters, judges, police, and competing politicians to stop him. Freedom is created by courts and a militia that demands them freedom and courts. Politicians are just entertainment – they figure out what to do with the profits that they can steal from the people. That’s what politicians do. Ukrainians have never had freedom. Feudal serfs, Soviet Serfs, and now post-soviet cattle to be farmed for the benefit of those in power – in the Russian and Asian model. But for the ordinary people to have profits they must have credit and for credit they must have rule of law. And to have rule of law – all able bodied men must take up arms to demand it. A credible threat alone is enough to force it to happen. SLAVA UKRAINI Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev Ukraine

  • “Can’t We All Get Along? Sunni-Shi’a Commonalities”— Just read this. You know,

    —“Can’t We All Get Along? Sunni-Shi’a Commonalities”—

    Just read this. You know, getting along as far as I can tell, is just a matter of not fighting until you have an opportunity to win without fighting.

    Polities don’t ‘get along’ because if they did they’d lose the genetic battle. Polities merely cooperate until they can conquer one another.

    Yeah, well sorry, but I can’t look at history and conclude anything else.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 10:16:00 UTC

  • FACEBOOK: VALUE AND DECLINING VALUE So, FB was of extraordinary value in: – deve

    FACEBOOK: VALUE AND DECLINING VALUE

    So, FB was of extraordinary value in:

    – developing the anti-libertine arguments

    – developing the truth arguments.

    – solving the problem of critical rationalism’s rationalism.

    – forcing me (always) to simplify my arguments.

    But I need to (and I need others with me) to spend more time on the internet blogs soon where the more difficult arguments are conducted. I can’t do it yet, because the business is in too early a stage. But I will feel confident by the spring making that change in investment. Or rather, I will still sketch ideas here, but will spend a little more time writing for the blogs. Conservative and academic blogs are superior to libertarian blogs, whereas on FB libertarian arguments are superior to conservative arguments. This has to do with the distribution of our different talents in the biases.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 10:02:00 UTC

  • THEY WERE WRONG. WE SURVIVED THE LAST ICE AGE. BTW: If you haven’t seen this it’

    http://cogweb.ucla.edu/ep/Frost_06.htmlSO THEY WERE WRONG. WE SURVIVED THE LAST ICE AGE.

    BTW: If you haven’t seen this it’s fun:

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 09:07:00 UTC

  • CAUGHT ONE – “HIGH TREASON”

    http://www.rferl.org/content/treason-ukraine-bik-arrest-counterintelligence/26683395.htmlWE CAUGHT ONE – “HIGH TREASON”

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-10 07:52:00 UTC