Author: Curt Doolittle

  • (joy) All the pretty dresses. Sigh. Spring

    (joy)

    All the pretty dresses. Sigh.

    Spring.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-28 08:56:00 UTC

  • ARGUMENTATIVE STANCES Argument as appeal. Argument as persuasion. vs Argument as

    ARGUMENTATIVE STANCES

    Argument as appeal.

    Argument as persuasion.

    vs

    Argument as discovery.

    Argument as test of argument (falsification)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-27 09:31:00 UTC

  • MATCHSTICKS Philosophy is too much like giving children matches to play with. An

    MATCHSTICKS

    Philosophy is too much like giving children matches to play with. And as Durant said, there are really no answers there. History is the only evidence of the nature of man, and the answers to our political nature are there. Philosophy is, at best, just a tool that helps us reduce our ever-present tendency to err. It is more often a tool by which we increase our errors. At its worst, it is a tool for self deception, or the deception of others.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-27 09:02:00 UTC

  • BURNING OBSCURANT AND PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY ON THE PYRE OF DECEPTION Most of my at

    BURNING OBSCURANT AND PLATONIC PHILOSOPHY ON THE PYRE OF DECEPTION

    Most of my attacks on a priorism are tests to see if the delta in utility between ratio-empirical and ‘Real’, and aprioristic-deductive and platonic, is sufficient to compel a change in method, but I am clearly dealing with very habituated people, and not giving them enough of a breadcrumb trail. And worse, I’m leading them into a dark and unfamiliar conceptual forest where they don’t want to follow. What do moral men do, when moral intuition fails them? They can’t do much until they learn enough new tools with which to restate their emotional intuitions in different terms now that the old terms are invalidated.

    Even the best people, who tend to be technologists, conflate general rule, theory, and axiom, into a single utilitarian category. Yet again demonstrating the difference between knowledge of use and knowledge of construction.

    I suppose I will just keep attacking a priorism as incomplete, and utilitarian, but now also as immoral obscurantism, and part of the continental-kantian and cosmopolitan-hermeneutic forms of deception. Part of the revolt against ratio-scientific.

    Although since I’ve already outed Rothbardian ethics as parasitic, and stated that Misesian praxeology was an error, I suppose that adding that a priorism (or any kantian construct) is immoral obscurantism, and part of the continental-cosmopolitan attack on human reason so loathed by Rand is just a continuation of my criticisms.

    So libertarianism as constructed, prior to its ratio-scientific expression in Propertarianism, is:

    a) parasitic

    b) insufficient for the production of a voluntary polity.

    c) argumentatively obscurant and immoral

    d) fails the test of its claims (deducibility of the scope of economics)

    e) inferior to ratio-scientific method for the accumulation of general rules of human behavior.

    But with Propertarianism, all of these faults are corrected.

    Of course people being as simple as they are, and even the best philosophers fairly weak, it’s probably lost that my attack on a priorism is an attempt to delegitimize on the right and libertarian spectrum, the same as I delegitimize on left-postmodern and socialist programs.

    I can’t kill off the obscurantist deceptions of the left without killing off the same techniques on the libertarian corner of the political spectrum. No matter what corner of the political spectrum one advocates, the prohibition on obscurantism that invalidates the arguments of the others, invalidates one’s own as well.

    All I have to do with the right is to give them a rational language. Most of what they believe is right in the first place. They just don’t have the ability to talk about it in rational terms – and perhaps once I focus there, I’ll be equally frustrated by their lack of intellectualism and mindless dependence on moral intuition. And perhaps at that point I will have to fight the battle against religion. But I think that religion cohabitates with propertarianism as comfortably as does capitalism.

    BUT LIBERTARIANS DON’T GET A FREE PASS. I’m burning continental philosophy, cosmopolitan philosophy, psychological philosophy (classical liberal), and marxist-socialist-postmodern philosophy on the same pyre. And it is a bonfire unlike any before it.

    The Ratio-scientific form of argument under Propertarianism (moral realism) is all that remains. Because it is the only moral form of discourse on ethics itself. Everything else is deception, fraud or worse.

    Burn, baby, burn.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-27 08:49:00 UTC

  • UPDATE: (a) RUSSIA WILL INVADE (b) AND REASONS WHY (one of the better articles)

    http://www.kyivpost.com/content/ukraine/james-sherr-it-is-time-we-stopped-praising-ukraine-for-exercising-restraint-340991.htmlUKRAINE UPDATE: (a) RUSSIA WILL INVADE (b) AND REASONS WHY

    (one of the better articles)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-27 07:58:00 UTC

  • (Still under the weather a bit but I can at least do research this morning witho

    (Still under the weather a bit but I can at least do research this morning without forgetting what I”m reading halfway through a sentence – or even that I’m reading a sentence. lol)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-26 03:23:00 UTC

  • (I was too embarrassed to admit that I routinely translate entire books using Go

    (I was too embarrassed to admit that I routinely translate entire books using Google’s translation service. Emmanuel Todd isn’t available in English. But I guess if Bennett and Lotus do it, then I can come out of the closet.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-26 03:12:00 UTC

  • “The absence of a workable integrated theory of economics and politics reflects

    –“The absence of a workable integrated theory of economics and politics reflects the lack of systematic thinking about the central problem of violence in human societies.”– Violence and Social Orders (Preface).

    The fundamental problem of cooperation is the suppression of free riding. Violence is but one of the many tools used by free riders.

    Our emphasis on suppressing violence distracts us from the insufficiency of suppressing violence in creating a polity capable of generating wealth in a division of knowledge and labor.

    Very poor societies manage to prevent violence and theft. What they do not prevent is every other possible means of free riding.

    The smaller the family size the higher the trust in any polity.

    But for small family sizes suppression of free riding must be nearly universal.

    And therefore not only must we possess property rights to allow small families to engage in production, but we must suppress all forms of involuntary transfer to lower the risk enough to do so. (ANF societies are fragile.)

    By eliminating free riding we obtain trust, and the low transaction costs that come with trust. In seeking to obtain trust, non-aggression is not enough.

    The source of any liberty was, is, and will always be, the organized use of violence to suppress free riding in all its forms.

    The reason that democracy, policy and economics are in conflict is the intellectual failure to address the incompatible moral codes of the different demographic groups, and the degree of trust vs demand for intervention, that is expressed by these different groups.

    As such, western high trust, which is an extension of the absolute nuclear family, democracy, rule of law, and the high economic performance of the few high trust societies, are assumed to be the consequence of democracy.

    Whereas democracy is a luxury of the high trust society.

    There is no free lunch. You either accept universal absolute nuclear families and total suppression of free riding in all its forms as a high cost you must bear for prosperity and liberty, or instead, you obtain some variant of every other lower and lowest trust societies on the planet.

    No way out. Period.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-25 21:00:00 UTC

  • “By using the case of Finland the way he does, Rothbard is trying to use an exam

    –“By using the case of Finland the way he does, Rothbard is trying to use an example of successful military resistance to Soviet expansionism to argue that there was no such thing as Soviet expansionism by military means.”–

    Typical Rothbardian logic: nonsense.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-25 19:56:00 UTC

  • “The modern equivalent of communes would be seasteads.”– Arnold Kling

    –“The modern equivalent of communes would be seasteads.”– Arnold Kling.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-03-25 02:53:00 UTC