Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552601824 Timestamp) THE FIRST MISTAKE —“People start with violence off the table. Even deep thinkers (perhaps especially thinkers).”— Brandon Hayes

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552601280 Timestamp) —” NAP rings true for them because they ALREADY accept the preconditions that the NAP assumes – it’s a self-fulfilling prophecy.”—JWarren Prescott

  • (FB 1552585120 Timestamp) told ya so

    (FB 1552585120 Timestamp) told ya so.

  • (FB 1552580899 Timestamp) I need to make one of these for deceits

    (FB 1552580899 Timestamp) I need to make one of these for deceits

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552608800 Timestamp) APPARENTLY TO BE CLASSIFIED AS A PHILOSOPHER YOU MUST MAKE YOUR IDEA ACCESSIBLE TO 5 YEAR OLDS —“Curt is not a philosopher by any means. He cannot even understand his own Confusion in order to boil it down into a simple manner in which common folk can grasp it instantly. If you cannot explain your ideas to a 5 year old child without them understanding them logically – you fail to comprehend yet, you own thoughts and imaginations in order to be able to judge them with discernment and thus avoid making a fool of yourself…”—Nacherel Tav This is a lie right? Can you explain programming to a five year old? The formal logics? Arithmetic, Geometry, Calculus, analysis and algebra? No you can’t. When Propertarianism is indifferent from writing law in a formal logic in a formal syntax, just like programming, with a formal set of types,. I can diagram all of it in about eight slides. But it’s a university degree level discipline. What you mean is I can’t produce an IDEOLOGY. Do you understand Kant, or Heidegger, or Aristotle or even darwin? Well, P is slightly easier than each. Precisely because it is formal. So if those men are philosophers then why am I not?

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552604252 Timestamp) —“Force should be asserted early and often to insure the expected treatment that you demand of others and conversely what others expect of you.”—Jarrod Marma

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    (FB 1552598676 Timestamp) (must read) by James Fox Higgins I’m seeing a number of people who are struggling with some of the core ideas of Curt Doolittle’s Propertarianism like property-in-toto which observes that one man’s ideal of the concept “property” may differ from another’s, just as in some cultures women are considered a man’s property which we in the Christian west find abhorrent. But the reality remains: in the Islamic state, women ARE the property of their men. It doesn’t make it morally right. It’s just an empirical fact. I thought Curt was Satan incarnate until it clicked for me that he is not in the business of moralisms like just about every other philosopher is. He’s not dealing with Platonic ideals. He’s dealing with Aristotelean empiricism. Not what ought to be (which is culturally relative), but what is (which is empirical). Words like “legitimate property” are ideals, but fail to argue against what really occurs: people defend with force that which they consider to be theirs. Those with the greater will to power, control such moral definitions. You really think the men of radical Islam will care about our Christian moralisms if they gain control of our lands? Might doesn’t make make right, might makes rule. You can talk about property moralistically if you like, but it has no bearing on the empirical reality. Wishful thinking seldom changes the reality of those who don’t accept your definitions but do have a greater will to power. This is what propertarianism is about: using language to describe what actually is, not what ought to be. Your ideals-based definitions of property are fine if you preface them with “I prefer” or “I wish” or “what would be ideal to me is” or “what is most in line with Christian ethics is”… But when it comes down to it… Bane OWNED Gotham city, until Batman took it back. Morality is only as good (in practise) as those with the will to protect it. Morality is God-given, but it is protected by the will and flesh of men. If you won’t fight for what is yours and what you believe in your heart to be right, you’re just relying on others to do it for you so you can quibble over the language of “legitimate property”. When the barbarians take your lands, livestock, and women, it is (empirically) theirs. Same applies to anything you value. Own it and defend it, or accept that others will.

  • (FB 1552585120 Timestamp) told ya so

    (FB 1552585120 Timestamp) told ya so.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552652183 Timestamp) His ‘manifesto’ is quite good really. Pls Keep Discourse “Within FB Limits”) ( update: posted on the site as NZ Manifesto )

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (FB 1552652183 Timestamp) His ‘manifesto’ is quite good really. Pls Keep Discourse “Within FB Limits”) ( update: posted on the site as NZ Manifesto )