Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • am a big fan of the 100% transparent law enforcement initiative. If you want it,

    https://petitions.whitehouse.gov/petition/mike-brown-law-requires-all-state-county-and-local-police-wear-camera/8tlS5czfI am a big fan of the 100% transparent law enforcement initiative.

    If you want it, then this is the only way you can have it.

    I usually recommend juries as the solution to most political decisions. And social media is a better manager of bureaucratic behavior than hierarchy.

    (My product also works a bit like this. Management always has perverse incentives.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 07:27:00 UTC

  • Entrepreneurship. Identify and satisfy demand. 🙂

    Entrepreneurship. Identify and satisfy demand. 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 07:21:00 UTC

  • on Ray Percival’s commitment to reason. STIPULATIONS It is rational to hold opin

    http://www.amazon.com/The-Myth-Closed-Mind-Understanding/dp/0812696859/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top/181-2526688-3304011Thoughts on Ray Percival’s commitment to reason.

    STIPULATIONS

    It is rational to hold opinions.

    It is rational to hold desperately to opinions.

    It is rational to hold desperately to opinions even in the face of overwhelming argumentative evidence that one cannot refute.

    It is rational to hold to opinions and beliefs as a deliberate choice if one prefers to imagine the world as one wishes, versus represent it correspondingly.

    It is rational to hold to opinions and beliefs and to conduct constant selection bias because there exist a multitude of applications in which arational, and seemingly irrational behavior are beneficial strategies, immune to argumentative change.

    THEREFORE

    The rationality of a belief is not a truth proposition post-hoc, but a volitional necessity given the preconditions set by one’s ignorance.

    This constrains rationality to constituent ignorance.

    ??No opinion then is criticizable as irrational?? Or is it that only simple and well constructed ideas are criticizable as irrational.

    ABSENT FROM CONSIDERATION

    The opportunity cost of erroneous ideas is neutral.

    The cost of conducting persuasive argument is immaterial.

    The difference in cost between the construction and distribution of various false and deceptive arguments, and truthful and honest arguments is immaterial.

    The persistence of human cognitive biases, of metaphysical assumptions, of religious, philosophical, intellectual, and normative convictions, are rational tools, and therefore immaterial.

    FALSE DICHOTOMY

    First criticism as a false dichotomy:

    1) Irrational: a statement that is internally inconsistent in construction, and we cannot determine if it would produce desired outcomes, or if it would produce undesirable outcomes.

    2) arational: a statement that is not internally consistent in construction but whose use produces desirable outcomes.

    3) rational: a statement that is internally consistent, and whose use produces desired outcomes.

    As far as I know, an arational argument is scientifically demonstrable (knowledge of use), even if scientifically inexplicable (knowledge of construction).

    As far as I know, a rational argument must be both explicable (knowledge of construction), and demonstrable(knowledge of use).

    As far as I know, an irrational argument is neither explicable (knowledge of construction) nor demonstrable(knowledge of use).

    FURTHERMORE

    The absence of a logic of cooperation renders all moral arguments extant untestable, yet all political arguments are governed by moral constraints. As such no moral arguments can be rational?

    The use of language consisting of aggregated meanings (functions) masks the underlying assumptions and renders arguments untestable, and deceptive.

    The use of in-group identity bias literally ‘pays’ people to believe things that are irrational as stated, but rational to pursue for their group’s purposes. In other words, religious and cultural ‘beliefs’ produce high returns, and therefore may not be rational, or irrational, but arational.

    CONCLUSIONS

    Therefore unlike the calm, timeless, costless world of scientific philosophy, and its pursuit of platonic truth, the opposite is true, particularly under democracy: we are fighting, always, to use the violence of government to extract money from some purpose to apply it to some other purpose, in real time, with real consequences, and ignorance is a luxury in the philosophy of science but not in life.

    Scientists consider the pursuit of truth independent of cost. No one else has that luxury. Scientists are a privileged class and advocate the belief systems of a privileged class. Unlike scientists, who are not temporally bound, or theologians who are neither temporally, or existentially bound, human action requires we compensate for temporal and existential constraints, as well as opportunity costs.

    Because the purpose of thought is action. We do not live in the garden of eden. And that is the culture of the Academy: the Cathedral. The pretense of costlessness in a world constituted of the necessity of human action guided entirely by prices.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 06:46:00 UTC

  • Pretty girls, stray cats, graffiti. Its the people that make a place downtrodden

    Pretty girls, stray cats, graffiti.

    Its the people that make a place downtrodden, not the property.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 05:22:00 UTC

  • Analytic was close. Operational was the answer. Why did philosophers get it wron

    Analytic was close.

    Operational was the answer.

    Why did philosophers get it wrong?

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 04:40:00 UTC

  • When Might Apple Begin To Decline?

    When the profitability of the iPhone is sufficiently diminished that a new income stream must be developed, yet Apple execs are unwilling to conquer the desktop market that is sitting there for them to just take away from Microsoft on a scale not seen since Microsoft did the same to IBM.

    https://www.quora.com/When-might-Apple-begin-to-decline

  • How Do Family Relationships Differ Between Countries?

    INTERESTING QUESTION:

    The family structure determines:
    1. the amount of inbreeding
    2. the inheritance system
    3. the private property rights that originate with the inheritance system
    4. the degree of trust extended to non-family members, with inbreeding producing lower overall trust, and outbreeding higher trust.
    5. the degree degree of authority necessary to maintain order (prevent violence in retaliation for unethical and immoral actions.)
    6. the level of corruption demonstrated by members of the government, since they are merely members of society in a position to abuse authority.
    7. the mobility of labor, since the larger the family structure the harder it is to move it to capital.
    8. the economic velocity of the polity (wealth).
    Conversely increase in family size determines:
    • the degree of alienation and loneliness, since family members treat you almost always better than others will.
    • the stress of raising children, since sharing child rearing across generations is so much easier.
    • The redistribution family members provide each other with.
    • the insurance from the vagaries of the economy and life
    • the demand for the state to provide all of the above in the absence of the family that the state has destroyed in pursuit of economic velocity. 🙂

    LIST OF FAMILY STRUCTURES

    SMALL HOMOGENEOUS HIGH TRUST PRIVILEGED SOCIETIES CAN TOLERATE HIGHLY REDISTRIBUTIVE GOVERNMENTS
    • STATE FINANCED SINGLE PARENT FAMILY – Medium term and short term pairings with or without a marriage ceremony that produces offspring, whereupon the parents cease cohabitation, and state redistribution finances directly or indirectly the support of the mother’s household.

    HIGH TRUST SOCIETIES WITH HIGHER ECONOMIC VELOCITY, CAN TOLERATE LIBERTARIAN GOVERNMENTS

    • ABSOLUTE NUCLEAR FAMILY – The “absolute nuclear” family is liberal and non-egalitarian (that is, indifferent to equality). Children are completely free upon adulthood, founding independent families. Inheritance is freely distributed by will.
    • NUCLEAR FAMILY, EGALITARIAN NUCLEAR – The “egalitarian nuclear” family is liberal and egalitarian. Children are completely free upon adulthood, founding independent families. Inheritance is equally distributed, implying at least a vestigial necessary link between parents and children throughout their lives.


    MEDIUM TRUST MARGINAL SOCIETIES WITH MEDIUM ECONOMIC VELOCITY – REQUIRE SOCIAL DEMOCRATIC GOVERNMENTS

    • EXTENDED FAMILY, STEM FAMILY, AUTHORITARIAN FAMILY – The “stem” family is authoritarian and inegalitarian. Several generations may live under one roof, notably the first-born, who will inherit the entirety of property and family headship (and thus perpetuate the family line). Other children typically leave the home to get married or become priests/soldiers.

      A family that extends beyond the immediate family, consisting of grandparents, aunts, uncles, and cousins all living nearby or in the same household. The stem family is sometimes associated with inegalitarian inheritance practices, as in Japan and Korea, but the term has also been used in some contexts to describe a family type where parents live with a married child and his or her spouse and children, but the transfer of land and moveable property is more or less egalitarian. In these cases, the child who cares for the parents usually receives the house in addition to his or her own share of land and moveable property.

    LOW TRUST, POOR SOCIETIES WITH LOW ECONOMIC VELOCITY – REQUIRE  AUTHORITARIAN GOVERNMENTS

    • TRADITIONAL FAMILY, COMMUNITARIAN FAMILY – The “communitarian” family is authoritarian and equal. Several generations live under the same roof until the eldest die and the inheritance is divided equally.
    • HETAERISTIC MONOGAMY – Monogamy with frequent extra marriage sexual relations.
    • PAIRING FAMILY, SERIAL MARRIAGE – Medium term pairing of individuals either in patrilineal or matrilineal property systems.
    • CONSANGUINE FAMILY – three generations of interrelated individuals live together (pre-polynesian) without any prohibition on relations. Property is irrelevant in this system.

    https://www.quora.com/How-do-family-relationships-differ-between-countries

  • What Percentage Of New Questions On Quora Are Created By Software Bots?

    Enough that I don’t want to play this fking game much longer.

    https://www.quora.com/unanswered/What-percentage-of-new-questions-on-Quora-are-created-by-software-bots

  • How Does The Libertarian Party View The Electoral College? Are There Any Reasons, If They Do Or Do Not?

    The libertarian argument would suggest that if an electoral college is necessary to prevent the imposition of the will of the populated states upon the less populated states that it is time to move to nullification and secession.  Any statement beyond that is mere pragmatism on the part of the party members.

    https://www.quora.com/How-does-the-Libertarian-party-view-the-electoral-college-Are-there-any-reasons-if-they-do-or-do-not

  • Is It Possible To Reconcile Tort Reform And Libertarian Philosophy?

    Um.  This isn’t necessarily a libertarian issue so much as a logical one.  The problem is that jury determination of penalties is arbitrary, and incalculable so that risk is un-measurable, and that penalties of scale are just passed on to consumers.  This means that lawsuits can be pursued as lottery ticket purchases by all but the defendant, and that organizations must seek to escape rather than honestly resolve disputes.

    The libertarian argument would require the elimination of limited liability, the removal of employee indemnification, and of management and board liability. All of these existing protections were provided by the government in order to allow abuses of the law in order to increase employment and tax revenues. So, instead, libertarians would recommend that all employees and all employers carry insurance against malfeasance. And that insurance companies would require a great deal of contractual adherence, training in exchange, in order to cover losses.  Misbehavior would break the contract, pierce any corporate veil, and open every employee, manger, executive, and board member in the causal chain to personal suit.

    If you want a less corrupt america, then remove the government from the process – because the government is the cause.

    This is the best I can do in short form, but it should get the libertarian point across: the common law, civic participation, personal accountability, and insurance companies provide market incentives that bureaucratic monopolies do not.

    https://www.quora.com/Is-it-possible-to-reconcile-tort-reform-and-libertarian-philosophy