Author: Curt Doolittle

  • PSEUDOSCIENCE AT ITS BEST (cross posted for archival purposes) From Rothbard. AX

    PSEUDOSCIENCE AT ITS BEST

    (cross posted for archival purposes)

    From Rothbard.

    AXIOM

    “…praxeology contains one Fundamental Axiom–the axiom of action–which may be called a priori, and a few subsidiary postulates which are actually empirical.”

    POSTULATES

    (Postulate 1) A “…variety of resources, both natural and human. From this follows directly the division of labor, the market, etc.; ” (Believe it or not that is a direct quote.)

    (Postulate 2) Leisure is a consumer good.

    (Postulate 3) Indirect exchanges occur.

    (Postulate 4) Every firm aims always at maximizing its psychic profit; and this may or may not involve maximizing its money profit, and or also stated as everyone tries always to maximize his utility.

    ASSERTIONS (completely meaningless)

    (a) that the fundamental axioms and premises of economics are absolutely true;

    (b) that the theorems and conclusions deduced by the laws of logic from these postulates are therefore absolutely true;

    (c) that there is consequently no need for empirical “testing,” either of the premises or the conclusions; and

    (d) that the deduced theorems could not be tested even if it were desirable.

    Both mises’ essay “Ultimate Foundation of Economic Science”, and Rothbards “Extreme Apriorism” are pseudoscientific arguments using the ‘Critique’ (obscurantism) developed over many centuries by jewish scholars. That is, to construct a hollow theory as a framework for criticism. The point is not to construct a theory that actually provides explanatory power, or is scientifically testable, but that casts doubt upon the opposing theory.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 09:24:00 UTC

  • (health)(personal) It’s a pretty strange experience to observe (if you can) how

    (health)(personal)

    It’s a pretty strange experience to observe (if you can) how your own mind changes as you recover from long term illness – even long term illnesses like cancer or infections that you can’t perceive as pain, or even identify as other than malaise.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 08:38:00 UTC

  • UPDATE: OVERSING PROGRESS (nerds) Our product, Oversing, has evolved from lookin

    UPDATE: OVERSING PROGRESS

    (nerds)

    Our product, Oversing, has evolved from looking and feeling like ‘Supersized-Jira’ to a full blown ERP/PSA.

    We took an interesting technical risk by using our “Panel” UI to construct task, role, and function based user interfaces out of a set of available panels.

    This risk had the potential to overload the DOM, but it seems that with judicious use of Backbone and hand coding we have managed to pull off a next-generation UI that is well… amazing, and we have not even tried to refactor for performance yet. (I love using denormalization-on-update to speed selects, and the devs just do not like it at *all*. But I will win in the end. 🙂 )

    Anyway, there is nothing like Oversing. Anywhere.

    We are a year and a half into it. And it’s beginning to come together.

    It will take us three years to put the whole scope of work together. And at that point the “ERP for Everybody”, I am pretty sure, will be on desktops and laptops everywhere.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 08:35:00 UTC

  • WHAT DOES IT MEAN? The state collects: (a) all our search requests (b) all our c

    WHAT DOES IT MEAN?

    The state collects:

    (a) all our search requests

    (b) all our communications

    (c) all our financial transactions

    (d) all our medical information

    (e) all our weapon information

    (f) all our travel information

    (g) all our tax information

    (h) all our title information (real property)

    (i) all our marriage and divorce information.

    (j) all our birth and death information

    + and insurance companies collect:

    (k) all our risk information (our forecasts)

    + and private companies collect our:

    (l) genetic information

    IT MEANS WE ARE CATTLE.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 07:28:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.salon.com/2013/10/28/silicon_valley_dreams_of_secession/


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 03:11:00 UTC

  • Everything that’s wrong

    Everything that’s wrong…


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-26 02:19:00 UTC

  • SOURCE OF LIBERTY IS AN ARMED POPULACE Ukraine starts the revolution now

    http://gunssavelives.net/blog/ukrainian-citizens-want-their-own-constitutional-amendment-to-own-guns/THE SOURCE OF LIBERTY IS AN ARMED POPULACE

    Ukraine starts the revolution now.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-25 14:42:00 UTC

  • OF ENDEMIC CORRUPTION IN KIEV: “PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR” I lived in a very nice sma

    http://24tv.ua/home/showSingleNews.do?turchynov_dismisses_presidential_advisors&objectId=413772&lang=enEXAMPLE OF ENDEMIC CORRUPTION IN KIEV: “PRESIDENTIAL ADVISOR”

    I lived in a very nice small hotel in downtown for a long time. And in the morning I’d go down for breakfast and sit on the veranda overlooking the street.

    One of the frequent characters was a fellow who always seemed to meet foreigners and talk to them about doing business in Ukraine.

    Eventually we moved mutual recognition, then to morning smiles, and I finally introduced myself. We spoke briefly. .He gave me his card. He was an “Advisor to the President”. Which seemed strange to me because he looked far more like a carpet salesman than anyone with deep knowledge of any kind of civil affairs.

    Over time I gathered enough information by ‘accidental’ listening, to understand that he was a gatekeeper for foreign businesses in Ukraine. If you want to start a business, obtain credit, film a movie, or gain access to television and media, you could pay ‘fees’ for the his ‘service’.

    His service involved collecting bribes on behalf of the president in exchange for ‘assistance’ in accomplishing your goals.

    I haven’t seen him lately. I don’t remember his name. But I’m pretty sure that the list of ‘advisors’ is a lot longer than the official one.

    Today, the parliament dismissed an whole list of ‘advisors’.

    Story below.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-25 14:40:00 UTC

  • THE ALTERNATIVE TO PSEUDOSCIENCE The natural state of man is to adapt his family

    THE ALTERNATIVE TO PSEUDOSCIENCE

    The natural state of man is to adapt his family (reproductive organization), and his rules of cooperation (property rights, norms, rituals and myths) to the continuous changes in the structure of production made possible by his technical advancements.

    There exists no natural state of man, only natural PROPERTIES of man. Two of those properties are the necessity of voluntary cooperation and the problem of free riding that emerges from it.

    Any cooperative organism must solve the problem as it evolves: creating incentives both in favor of production and against free riding and parasitism.

    Expansion of production in a division of knowledge and labor increases the opportunity for free riding and parasitism because of increasing anonymity of the participants the structure of production.

    Expansion of production requires increases in the complexity of the tools of cooperation: those that assist in transforming the imperceptible to analogy to experience, such that increasing complexity is open to calculation; and such that information distribution expands as well.

    Each major advancement in human cooperation has been achieved by increasing the information processing capacity of the population such that not only actions are open to voluntary coordination, but also such that free riding is increasingly suppressed.

    When we invented government we traded pervasive high transaction costs from violence fraud and deception, for systemic free riding and corruption. Thanks to Hoppe we know how to construct some necessary institutions that will make it more difficult to conduct free riding and corruption.

    But the answer ‘no government’ is actually admission of failure. It is still necessary for groups to coordinate their interests in a commons that produces beneficial common goods. Just as it is beneficial for shopping mall owners and market owners to produce investments that are beneficial to both vendors and customers as well as owners. Just as it is beneficial for all of us to construct norms that prohibit all forms of free riding, discounting, cheating and stealing.

    Competing government do not solve the problem of high local transaction costs. So the argument in favor of heterogeneous competing polities works if and only if there is some monarch that profits from all equally and polices all equally. (Which is where ROthbard and Mises got their ideas from: the ghetto.) For people to grand one another property rights voluntarily without a superior state or empire, they will require universally low transaction costs – at least locally. People demonstrate this everywhere and anywhere in history.

    So we are left with a large number of private monarchies as the compromise between the minimum homogeneity required, and the maximum size wherein a polity maintains a commonality of interest.

    At present, large city states with homogenous polities (the nordics) that are able to create reasonable amounts of liberty.. Even heavy redistribution is often tolerable to homogenous polities. Landed heterogeneous polities are notoriously intolerant of redistribution because it’s actually bad for the productive classes.


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-25 13:29:00 UTC

  • SCIENTIFIC FAILURE VS PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FAILURE (good piece) While I’d have to ag

    SCIENTIFIC FAILURE VS PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FAILURE

    (good piece)

    While I’d have to agree with Hoppe that Hayek didn’t focus enough on property rights, and did focus too much on psychology (like all good classical liberals), his study of the institutions of law are decidedly NOT pseudoscientific.

    Hayek’s work is hard to describe as failure, because it certainly was an improvement in intellectual history, even if he didn’t identify the causal properties of cooperation. But he did give us the arguments for necessity of the common law and the constitution.

    There is a very great difference between SCIENTIFIC FAILURE: Weber, Hayek, Kronecker, Poincaré, Brouwer and PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC FAILURE: Marx, Freud, Cantor, Russell, Keynes, Mises, Popper and Rothbard.

    What does it say about us that we don’t remember those scientific failures but we are attracted to pseudoscientific arguments like moths to the sociological flame?

    Is that because it is more comforting to rely upon the promise of the pseudoscientific and non falsifiable, than the promise of the scientific that is demonstrable as failure?

    A study of our history knowledge doesn’t tell us that. It tells us the opposite. That when we prove something is false that is when we know something that is true – that our idea was false. When we obtain new explanatory power we love to make use of it like a child with a new toy – rarely testing it. We love our pseudosciences.

    Hayek didn’t give us pseudoscience. Like Newton he was accurate but imprecise.

    Curt Doolittle

    Kiev.

    — notes for later —

    Weber was right that the advancement of civilization requires multiple special disciplines of ‘calculation’ such that

    Mises was right that a fundamental problem was economic calculation.

    Hayek was right that a fundamental problem is information.

    Hayek was right that simple rules are necessary

    Hayek was right that the common law and the constitution are required rules and rule systems.

    Rothbard I think was just plain wrong outside of his history.

    Hoppe was right as far as he took his arguments – which was pretty far. (Although I really wish he’d give up on argumentation.)


    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-25 13:28:00 UTC