Curt Doolittle

Author: Curt Doolittle

  • VANITY AND INTELLIGENCE IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES –“[Physical] scientists are ov

    VANITY AND INTELLIGENCE IN THE PHYSICAL SCIENCES

    –“[Physical] scientists are overwhelmingly atheist,” Dutton said. “This is predicted by their high IQ, which allows you to rise above emotion and see through the fallacious, emotional arguments.” Arguments about God are all emotional arguments, he added.”–

    I would argue, successfully I think; first, that intelligence forces a discount on the value and utility of the opinions of others.

    And second, that learning the contrarian displacement of mythos with reason and science grants one significant status signals in life.

    Unfortunately, it appears to be endemic, that very smart people rarely grasp that the dependence of the lesser intelligent, upon the opinions of others, is necessary for their ability to act by their own discretion.

    Nor do they grasp that these lesser minds cannot tell the difference between one set of snake oil salesmen and another.

    Nor do they grasp the pedagogical necessity of teaching the young through experiential analogy first – myth, and instrumental necessity second – science. And for many the instrumental – both logical and physical – is simply either unnecessary or irrelevant.

    For the average person, reliance upon the traditional and ‘time tested’ is simply THE MOST SCIENTIFIC AND RATIONAL COURSE OF ACTION available to them.

    I’m not uncomfortable stating that I discount the value of the opinions of others, and that I happily revel in the status signals that come with demonstrating one’s intelligence

    But I never make the erroneous assumption that myths and traditions and even superstitions, while ARATIONAL are irrational. They are not.

    And until each individual can experience an alternative that is superior to his myths and traditions, and the opinions of others, it is irrational to ask them to value, agree with, and adopt, what they cannot understand.

    Because if they cannot grasp it, then we are asking them to act upon FAITH in us. Rather than faith in the accumulated wisdom of centuries.

    It is a peculiar vanity of the intelligent to claim that they are the gods we should listen to.

    Myself included.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-18 05:58:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.nationalreview.com/node/371248/print

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-18 00:52:00 UTC

  • FAVORS “ARRIVAL OF THE FREQUENT” NOT SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST. —“Study demonstr

    http://phys.org/news/2014-02-evolutionary-important-success.htmlEVOLUTION FAVORS “ARRIVAL OF THE FREQUENT” NOT SURVIVAL OF THE FITTEST.

    —“Study demonstrates evolutionary ‘fitness’ is not the most important determinant of success – “By modeling populations over long timescales, the study showed that the ‘fitness’ of their traits was not the most important determinant of success. Instead, the most genetically available mutations dominated the changes in traits. The researchers found that the ‘fittest’ simply did not have time to be found, or to fix in the population over evolutionary timescales. The findings suggest that life on Earth today may not have come about by ‘survival of the fittest’, but rather by the ‘arrival of the frequent’.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-17 12:06:00 UTC

  • THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TRUTH: European Peoples and Dysgenia

    http://www.vdare.com/node/33432FROM THE DEPARTMENT OF HIGHLY OFFENSIVE TRUTH:

    European Peoples and Dysgenia.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-17 07:07:00 UTC

  • SECESSION Your rhetorical framework for both parts 1 and 2, is critical, and acc

    http://nomocracyinpolitics.com/2014/02/07/secession-and-messianic-statism-evaluating-the-current-union-of-the-states-part-1-by-allen-mendenhall/ON SECESSION

    Your rhetorical framework for both parts 1 and 2, is critical, and accurate, but it does not take into account that decentralization would distribute all the wealth, status, and trade negotiating power currently in washington to the regions, and reduce the transaction cost of conducting economic policy.

    The arguments for secession are (a) normative (b) institutional (c) economic (d) artistic and cultural, and (d) personal – given that status would be redistributed to individuals in the regions.

    The arguments against secession are that the value of the dollar, the value of the military, and the value of insurance against catastrophe by all other regions. But it’s possible (and simple) to preserve those properties, and secede at the same time.

    (BTW: When defining the state as a territorial monopoly, it’s Weber that Rothbard is quoting.)

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-17 03:57:00 UTC

  • SKASKIW : A CONVERSATION WITH GENGHIS KHAN (important) (new development) (Proper

    http://dailyanarchist.com/2014/02/16/a-conversation-with-genghis-khanROMAN SKASKIW : A CONVERSATION WITH GENGHIS KHAN

    (important) (new development) (Propertarianism)

    Roman is a gifted writer. And in this short piece he has produced the first literary application of Propertarianism’s additions to ethics.

    Moved. Awed. Inspired.

    (PLEASE SHARE!)

    Roman Skaskiw

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-17 03:25:00 UTC

  • IN UKRAINE – WHERE AMERICA IS HEADED (watch)

    http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=108_1392492062LIFE IN UKRAINE – WHERE AMERICA IS HEADED

    (watch)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-16 15:32:00 UTC

  • MAN IS FINE. IT”S **POSTMODERN MAN** THAT KILLED US

    http://takimag.com/article/the_curse_of_modern_man_taki?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+takimag+%28Taki%E2%80%99s+Magazine%29#axzz2tTWwxNONMODERN MAN IS FINE. IT”S **POSTMODERN MAN** THAT KILLED US.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-16 13:46:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-16 13:36:00 UTC

  • WHAT DO WE VIOLATE? –“…I’ve come to think of violence as amoral. The rapist,

    WHAT DO WE VIOLATE?

    –“…I’ve come to think of violence as amoral. The rapist, and the victim who kills him in self defense… one is immoral, the other moral. Nothing to do with the violence itself, but the violation of rights.”–

    One can produce property without rights — all living creatures do.

    But one cannot produce a right except via contractual exchange.

    So then, do property rights have any meaning outside of the context of a state or polity with whom one ostensibly holds a contract?

    What is the point of using this term “rights”? Its meaningless except in the context of some contract or other – a contract libertarians would almost always refuse to enter.

    You create your property by your own actions. If people try to appropriate you property against your wishes, then that is not a violation of your magical rights – its just an attack against your property. Period.

    In fact, the only reason to define morality any differently is to logically excuse parasitism.

    Then the only limit to your property is your own parasitism : free riding on others who produce benefits that you consume but that you fail to pay for.

    We need no rights whatsoever. We need only recognize property is the result of our actions. Nothing more.

    All platonism is false.

    We are supposed to be the smart people. We should try to demonstrate it. Libertarian shouldn’t mean “stupid”. Too often it does.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-02-16 11:14:00 UTC