Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • When We Perceive Something Wrong – We’re Right

    When We Perceive Something Wrong – We’re Right https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/when-we-perceive-something-wrong-were-right/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 15:53:19 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259149457771421697

  • The Simple Version of Metaphysics as Addiction

    May 3, 2020, 12:22 PM

    —“you don’t believe metaphysics is anything other than imagination”—

    So you didn’t understand then. You’re another one of the mouth breathers who say “calculus is hard so it must be false”. Here in simple terms for simple folks:

    1. Language consists of measurements organized into transactions and sets of transactions. We cannot speak in anything other than measurements of sense-perception-auto-association.
    2. We refer to each internally consistent system of measurement as “metaphysics” if we are using platonic (imaginary) vocabulary, and “paradigm” if we are using the descriptive (existential) language paradigm.

    3. There is only one most parsimonious system of measurement of physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of action. That language is what we call the formal(logical), physical(non-sentient), and social (sentient, action) sciences.

    4. All other systems of measurement vary from that most parsimonious paradigm. Each variation from that most parsimonious paradigm produces costly consequences for the individual, those who associate with the individual, the society that is affected by them, and the polity that includes them, and under some conditions the world.

    5. People have explicable incentives for a) varying from that most parsimonious paradigm. b) choosing a fictional narrative (parables, stories, networks of parables and stories (mythologies), as means of decision (choice) making. c) habituating the degree of separation of conflation the parsimonious paradigm (real unknown), experienced (real known) from the fictional paradigm (imagined).

    6. Our brains develop our minds in a predictable hierarchy from the sensory to the physical to the interpersonal to the rational, and the impulsive, normative, and considered, at varying rates. The degree of ‘friction’ due to developmental failures in our ability to learn each step in that hierarchy determines the degree of complexity we use for our ‘resting state’. Some of us more sensory, some more physical, some more imaginary, some more social, and some more rational resting states (our normal). And we are more or less able to express agency, or vulnerable to sedation givne our lack of agency dependent upon that resting state.

    7. We are all subject to involuntary defect (psychosis, schizophrenia), voluntary defect (sedatives, psychedelics stimulants) invent and construct addiction to because cognitive agency is costly in the face of uncertainty, amplified by one’s failures to reduce costs of calculating successful actions, amplified by one’s failures of prediction of outcomes, amplified by one’s competitive failures in the familial, social, economic and political marketplaces, and by amplified others rejection and low status in those marketplaces. The solution of course is to lower one’s demands to suit one’s market value (epicureanism), and to learn to insulate one’s self from market pressures (stoicism, buddhism, christianity). The problem being that most of us maintain biological demand for social interaction and membership so that we seek means of sedation by escape, psychological construction, social construction, or changing our social circumstance, or improving our agency and market value so that we are more competitive.

    8. We differ in cognitive ability, meaning we differ in the dependence upon a) physical sense-perception and auto association b) intuitionistic auto-associative valuation and subsequent emotional response c) prediction of social (empathic/short/interpersonal) and physical (physical/long/political) permutations, d) regulation of those predictions by direction of attention to differing predicted experiences and states, e) agency in selecting which of those regulated predictions we will permute upon in order to produce a desired outcome, f) skill in calculating (imputing, calculating and computing) the means of achieving those ends. Ergo we differ in demand for mindfulness (relief from competitive pressures), and our means of obtaining mindfulness.

    9. The difference in individual family, class, and group ability is not superiority but accumulated defects due to genetic load due to survival of defects under monogamy, familism, pastoralism, agrarianism, industrialism, and lack of selection pressures, combined competing with those who continuously suppress genetic load by continuous selection pressure, which produces evolution of neotonic maturity, rational agency, and calculative ability as a consequence.

    10. We have however discovered the genes for improving heart, muscle, lungs, and remove defects from liver, kidney, and stomach. So it is possible in the future to both add innovations and remove defects. Even if man’s continues dysgenic reproduction means we cannot control negative selection pressures (increasing genetic load) we can still speciate with elites by selective breeding (classes) and by selective genetic manipulation (positive eugenics).

    That’s the simple version in bullet points for simple folks.

  • The Simple Version of Metaphysics as Addiction

    May 3, 2020, 12:22 PM

    —“you don’t believe metaphysics is anything other than imagination”—

    So you didn’t understand then. You’re another one of the mouth breathers who say “calculus is hard so it must be false”. Here in simple terms for simple folks:

    1. Language consists of measurements organized into transactions and sets of transactions. We cannot speak in anything other than measurements of sense-perception-auto-association.
    2. We refer to each internally consistent system of measurement as “metaphysics” if we are using platonic (imaginary) vocabulary, and “paradigm” if we are using the descriptive (existential) language paradigm.

    3. There is only one most parsimonious system of measurement of physical, natural, and evolutionary laws of action. That language is what we call the formal(logical), physical(non-sentient), and social (sentient, action) sciences.

    4. All other systems of measurement vary from that most parsimonious paradigm. Each variation from that most parsimonious paradigm produces costly consequences for the individual, those who associate with the individual, the society that is affected by them, and the polity that includes them, and under some conditions the world.

    5. People have explicable incentives for a) varying from that most parsimonious paradigm. b) choosing a fictional narrative (parables, stories, networks of parables and stories (mythologies), as means of decision (choice) making. c) habituating the degree of separation of conflation the parsimonious paradigm (real unknown), experienced (real known) from the fictional paradigm (imagined).

    6. Our brains develop our minds in a predictable hierarchy from the sensory to the physical to the interpersonal to the rational, and the impulsive, normative, and considered, at varying rates. The degree of ‘friction’ due to developmental failures in our ability to learn each step in that hierarchy determines the degree of complexity we use for our ‘resting state’. Some of us more sensory, some more physical, some more imaginary, some more social, and some more rational resting states (our normal). And we are more or less able to express agency, or vulnerable to sedation givne our lack of agency dependent upon that resting state.

    7. We are all subject to involuntary defect (psychosis, schizophrenia), voluntary defect (sedatives, psychedelics stimulants) invent and construct addiction to because cognitive agency is costly in the face of uncertainty, amplified by one’s failures to reduce costs of calculating successful actions, amplified by one’s failures of prediction of outcomes, amplified by one’s competitive failures in the familial, social, economic and political marketplaces, and by amplified others rejection and low status in those marketplaces. The solution of course is to lower one’s demands to suit one’s market value (epicureanism), and to learn to insulate one’s self from market pressures (stoicism, buddhism, christianity). The problem being that most of us maintain biological demand for social interaction and membership so that we seek means of sedation by escape, psychological construction, social construction, or changing our social circumstance, or improving our agency and market value so that we are more competitive.

    8. We differ in cognitive ability, meaning we differ in the dependence upon a) physical sense-perception and auto association b) intuitionistic auto-associative valuation and subsequent emotional response c) prediction of social (empathic/short/interpersonal) and physical (physical/long/political) permutations, d) regulation of those predictions by direction of attention to differing predicted experiences and states, e) agency in selecting which of those regulated predictions we will permute upon in order to produce a desired outcome, f) skill in calculating (imputing, calculating and computing) the means of achieving those ends. Ergo we differ in demand for mindfulness (relief from competitive pressures), and our means of obtaining mindfulness.

    9. The difference in individual family, class, and group ability is not superiority but accumulated defects due to genetic load due to survival of defects under monogamy, familism, pastoralism, agrarianism, industrialism, and lack of selection pressures, combined competing with those who continuously suppress genetic load by continuous selection pressure, which produces evolution of neotonic maturity, rational agency, and calculative ability as a consequence.

    10. We have however discovered the genes for improving heart, muscle, lungs, and remove defects from liver, kidney, and stomach. So it is possible in the future to both add innovations and remove defects. Even if man’s continues dysgenic reproduction means we cannot control negative selection pressures (increasing genetic load) we can still speciate with elites by selective breeding (classes) and by selective genetic manipulation (positive eugenics).

    That’s the simple version in bullet points for simple folks.

  • Yes Marx Was a Pervert. so Was Rousseau. So Were Derrida and Foucault

    Yes Marx Was a Pervert. so Was Rousseau. So Were Derrida and Foucault https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/yes-marx-was-a-pervert-so-was-rousseau-so-were-derrida-and-foucault/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 15:13:41 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259139484739829760

  • Yes Marx Was a Pervert. so Was Rousseau. So Were Derrida and Foucault

    May 3, 2020, 1:33 PM Rousseau-Marx were perverts, Epstein-Madoff, and the NYC-Hollywood Self-Indulgence, Anti-Western-Excellence as dominance-expression crowd is all perverse. That’s how they War: Continuous incremental undermining by normalization of perversion, by baiting into hazard, under false promise of null effect. They war against us by destroying our civilization from within by taking advantage of our tolerance – when we will need to follow the russians, chinese, and now indians into INTOLERANCE of Abrahamic undermining using the female technique of false promise, baiting into hazard.

  • Yes Marx Was a Pervert. so Was Rousseau. So Were Derrida and Foucault

    May 3, 2020, 1:33 PM Rousseau-Marx were perverts, Epstein-Madoff, and the NYC-Hollywood Self-Indulgence, Anti-Western-Excellence as dominance-expression crowd is all perverse. That’s how they War: Continuous incremental undermining by normalization of perversion, by baiting into hazard, under false promise of null effect. They war against us by destroying our civilization from within by taking advantage of our tolerance – when we will need to follow the russians, chinese, and now indians into INTOLERANCE of Abrahamic undermining using the female technique of false promise, baiting into hazard.

  • Re: Mindfulness by Sh-T Talking vs Gsrrm

    Re: Mindfulness by Sh-T Talking vs Gsrrm https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/re-mindfulness-by-sh-t-talking-vs-gsrrm/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 15:00:45 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259136231964901377

  • Re: Mindfulness by Sh-T Talking vs Gsrrm

    May 3, 2020, 5:15 PM ( In response to this post: https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/272629420801885 )

    —“Christians remember all the times you allowed that yes, Christianity at least provides mindfulness. They’re reading this post about shit talking and the penny is going to drop. Some ways of getting an ounce of mindfulness are less costly than others. That’s why some ways need a monopoly and why you’re a blasphemer and The Little Old Lady was right and she didn’t beat you enough as a child and she should definitely make up for lost time. … Not that it will do any good. How am I doing today?”—Daniel Roland Anderson

    [W]ell, I read it to the little old lady and it sure made her day. πŸ˜‰ … You know, you understand what I’m doing. I have no idea how many others understand what I”m doing. But you’re one of the sharper tools in the shed. And I’m not sure the penny is going to drop (they’re going to understand). It would be interesting if they did. Because it would positively select for the best Christians – those who could lead. And because it would mean we could have rational conversations about leading each other’s frames. πŸ˜‰

    —“It’s fun to watch when I can see [what’s going on]β€”which means I’m not angry anymore. Not really. … But man. That Abrahamic bullshit cost me a lot of time, and has caused some damage to relationships that I had no idea how to avoid and still be the person I think my parents intended to raise. … And this has been very hard for them. … Ok. Maybe I’m still a little angry. πŸ˜‚πŸ€£πŸ˜‚πŸ€£ Whew. But by the time a man kills all his sacred cows he might be about one lonesome sumbitch. That’s what I think.”—

    Oh. An honest man. That’s what will make you lonely. πŸ˜‰

    —“Well, here’s the thing. I’ve got a long free will vs determinism thing going on. And it’s the kind of thorn in the side that bleeds funny sometimes.”—

    Truth is costly. Solutions are costly. Leadership is costly. But what we are purchasing the survival of our civilization. So I choose to pay the cost. An I understand that not all can fight this war becasue they cannot bear that cost. As the bard said: “But the greater share of glory to those of us who do”.

  • Re: Mindfulness by Sh-T Talking vs Gsrrm

    May 3, 2020, 5:15 PM ( In response to this post: https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle.personal/posts/272629420801885 )

    —“Christians remember all the times you allowed that yes, Christianity at least provides mindfulness. They’re reading this post about shit talking and the penny is going to drop. Some ways of getting an ounce of mindfulness are less costly than others. That’s why some ways need a monopoly and why you’re a blasphemer and The Little Old Lady was right and she didn’t beat you enough as a child and she should definitely make up for lost time. … Not that it will do any good. How am I doing today?”—Daniel Roland Anderson

    [W]ell, I read it to the little old lady and it sure made her day. πŸ˜‰ … You know, you understand what I’m doing. I have no idea how many others understand what I”m doing. But you’re one of the sharper tools in the shed. And I’m not sure the penny is going to drop (they’re going to understand). It would be interesting if they did. Because it would positively select for the best Christians – those who could lead. And because it would mean we could have rational conversations about leading each other’s frames. πŸ˜‰

    —“It’s fun to watch when I can see [what’s going on]β€”which means I’m not angry anymore. Not really. … But man. That Abrahamic bullshit cost me a lot of time, and has caused some damage to relationships that I had no idea how to avoid and still be the person I think my parents intended to raise. … And this has been very hard for them. … Ok. Maybe I’m still a little angry. πŸ˜‚πŸ€£πŸ˜‚πŸ€£ Whew. But by the time a man kills all his sacred cows he might be about one lonesome sumbitch. That’s what I think.”—

    Oh. An honest man. That’s what will make you lonely. πŸ˜‰

    —“Well, here’s the thing. I’ve got a long free will vs determinism thing going on. And it’s the kind of thorn in the side that bleeds funny sometimes.”—

    Truth is costly. Solutions are costly. Leadership is costly. But what we are purchasing the survival of our civilization. So I choose to pay the cost. An I understand that not all can fight this war becasue they cannot bear that cost. As the bard said: “But the greater share of glory to those of us who do”.

  • It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard

    It’s Our Duty to Protect Those Victimized by Baiting Into Hazard https://propertarianism.com/2020/05/09/its-our-duty-to-protect-those-victimized-by-baiting-into-hazard/


    Source date (UTC): 2020-05-09 14:59:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1259135915513053190