It’s actually pretty obvious that the only person who could think like a rothbardian libertarian is an autistic or narcissist that has only limited understanding of himself, and no understanding of others, and near total buy-in of the Marxist view of history claiming man was oppressed. When the opposite is true: man was forcibly domesticated against the will of the majority of men and women. And our prosperity is largely the result of that domestication – of the underclasses – and those regions that failed to domesticate their underclasses through suppressing their reproduction remained in poverty, disease, violence thievery, corruption and disease.
Category: Commentary, Critique, and Response
-
Only Autists, Narcissists, And The Anti Social Can Be Fooled By Rothbardianism.
It’s actually pretty obvious that the only person who could think like a rothbardian libertarian is an autistic or narcissist that has only limited understanding of himself, and no understanding of others, and near total buy-in of the Marxist view of history claiming man was oppressed. When the opposite is true: man was forcibly domesticated against the will of the majority of men and women. And our prosperity is largely the result of that domestication – of the underclasses – and those regions that failed to domesticate their underclasses through suppressing their reproduction remained in poverty, disease, violence thievery, corruption and disease.
-
William Butchman Hey man. I’m east coast. So next session whenever you’re ready.
William Butchman
Hey man. I’m east coast. So next session whenever you’re ready.
And btw, great podcast you just put out!
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 06:44:00 UTC
-
Curt Doolittle shared a post
Curt Doolittle shared a post.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 03:43:00 UTC
-
Untitled
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 00:10:00 UTC
-
Excellently stated
Excellently stated.
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-06 14:19:28 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/784035347835547648
Reply addressees: @SanguineEmpiric
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/783581114891841536
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/783581114891841536
-
LIVES MATTER (humor)
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2016/10/06/performers-organize-clown-lives-matter-march-in-hopes-to-quench-fears.htmlCLOWN LIVES MATTER
(humor)
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-06 07:43:00 UTC
-
(thank you Skye Stewart)
https://works.bepress.com/davideticchi/11/Yep.
(thank you Skye Stewart)
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-04 15:03:00 UTC
-
(Saw your presentation at PFS on the University. Good. And delivered with your u
(Saw your presentation at PFS on the University. Good. And delivered with your usual wit and charm. 🙂
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-04 14:32:00 UTC
-
Why Are So Many Scientists Bashing Philosophers?
1 – Philosophy has not kept up with developments: in particular, the universe is saying pretty consistently “I am simple”.2 – But it is much, much, more than this. It’s that: …… While undergraduate, graduate, and PhD physics programs improves the general understanding of the body politic, undergraduate, and graduate, and a very substantial part of the phd philosophy programs cause HARM to the general understanding of the body politic, second only to the pseudoscience of psychology, and third only to the pseudoscience of social science. So the issue is the HARM done by teaching philosophy as the literature of justificationary utopias, rather than the incremental knowledge we obtain in testifying (ensuring we are stating truth). As far as I can tell, philosophers have done far more harm than good in the past two hundred years. And before the past two hundred years, the list of philosophers that did good (Smith, Locke, Hume, Jefferson) is quite small, while the list of scientists and mathematicians who have done good (too many to list) quite large. And the list of philosophers who have done terrible harm (Rousseau and the entire french school, Kant and the entire german school, The entire cosmopolitan school: Boaz, Marx/Keynes, Freud, Cantor, Mises, Rand/Rothbard, Adorno in particular) is nearly endless.
3 – Why are philosophers of my generation bashing philosophers as in need of the same Operationalist revolution as has been forced on Physics and Psychology? 3.1 – Does not incorporate costs. 3.2 – Does not preserve 3.3 – Does not incorporate actionability. 3.4 – Meaning (verbalism) not truth (elimination of error) 3.5 – The unknowable communal Pareto ‘Good’, rather than the knowable interpersonal Nash Optimum. 3.6 – False understanding of Truth as Binary, logical, platonic rather than as a sequence of sufficient for given purposes: True Enough For: … – Understanding/Meaning, (Learning) … – Communication of Meaning ( communication, teaching) … – Opportunity Discovery, ( what most of us desire from learning ) … – Actionability, (domain of science, how is this possible) … – Voluntary Contract/Cooperation, (economics and ethics) … – Dispute resolution(decidability) (conflict and law)Curt Doolittle the Propertarian Institute L’viv Ukraine