Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • A Short Course on Propertarianism’s Testimonial Truth

    (promoted to post) (very good outline) [T]he Truth – as in the most parsimonious description we can possibly make – we cannot know, even if we speak it. Truthfulness on the other hand, we can know.
    LIMITS: TRUTHFUL ENOUGH FOR THE CONSEQUENCES http://www.propertarianism.com/…/…/21/a-hierarchy-of-truths/ DEFINITIONS OF TRUTHFULNESS http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/29/definitions-truth/ DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY FOR THE WARRANTY OF TRUTHFULNESS http://www.propertarianism.com/…/due-diligence-necessary-f…/ THE END OF HISTORY IS NOT DEMOCRACY BUT THE TRUTHFUL CIVILIZATION http://www.propertarianism.com/…/the-end-of-history-the-tr…/ FUKUYAMA DIDN”T UNDERSTAND http://www.propertarianism.com/…/13/fukuyama-didnt-underst…/ SCIENCE IS A MORAL DISCIPLINE IN WHICH WE WARRANTY THE TRUTHFULNESS OF OUR SPEECH. http://www.propertarianism.com/…/science-is-a-moral-discip…/ If scientists can warranty the truthfulness of their work, there is no reason the rest of us cannot do so. PHILOSOPHY MORALITY LAW AND SCIENCE CAN BE (AND SHOULD BE) IDENTICAL PROPOSITIONS http://www.propertarianism.com/…/philosophy-morality-scien…/ WE DISCOVERED TRUTH TELLING – WE DISCOVERED TRUTH. http://www.propertarianism.com/…/we-discovered-truth-telli…/ CULTURAL VARIANTS OF TRUTH http://www.propertarianism.com/…/cultural-variants-of-trut…/ THE CURE FOR PROPAGANDA AND THE RESTORATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION http://www.propertarianism.com/…/the-cure-for-propaganda-a…/ ITS EXPENSIVE, YES. THE COST OF ELMINATING PSEUDOSCIENCE IN ECONOMICS https://propertarianinstitute.com/2015/06/04/the-cost-of-eliminating-pseudoscience-in-economics/ WE JUST LEARN WHAT WORKS: TRUTH IN DEFENSE OF THE COMMONS http://www.propertarianism.com/…/we-never-know-anything-we…/ THE ONLY MEANS OF ELIMINATING THE STATE AND CONSTRUCTING LIBERTY http://www.propertarianism.com/…/the-only-means-of-elimina…/ LIBERTY IS LIKE TRUTH: THERE IS ALWAYS MORE OF IT TO BE FOUND http://www.propertarianism.com/…/…/14/liberty-is-like-truth/ SEE ALSO My Criticism Of David Miller Is A Very Limited One http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/04/06/my-criticism-of-david-miller-is-a-very-limited-one/ Reforming Libertarian Ethics http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/02/15/reforming-libertarian-ethics/ Curt Doolittle Testimonialism and Propertarianism The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Writing: Use of Proper Case

    [L]ook. If Popper can use Italics, then I can use Case. (Yet another thing Germans do right.). Proper casing of names of terms cues the reader. Using headlines, callouts, paragraph headlines and then bold on keywords has become common in print because it assists in helping the user scan the text, and to skip what he knows, and find what he doesn’t. The purpose of punctuation is to assist in reading aloud or in the equivalent inner voice. And good type handling is just good indexing. So if you still think in antique terms you are just stuck in an obsolete technology. Sorry. That’s how it is.

  • Writing: Use of Proper Case

    [L]ook. If Popper can use Italics, then I can use Case. (Yet another thing Germans do right.). Proper casing of names of terms cues the reader. Using headlines, callouts, paragraph headlines and then bold on keywords has become common in print because it assists in helping the user scan the text, and to skip what he knows, and find what he doesn’t. The purpose of punctuation is to assist in reading aloud or in the equivalent inner voice. And good type handling is just good indexing. So if you still think in antique terms you are just stuck in an obsolete technology. Sorry. That’s how it is.

  • Propertarian Arguments are Categorically Proofs.  (And a note on painful births 🙂 )

    [A] proof is a test of internal consistency. A proof is not a truth proposition. It is merely a statement of existential possibility: that by (a)the given axioms, or (b)the possible operations, and (c) the tests of subjective incentive at each opportunity for choice, that the given argument is possible. Testimonialism and Propertarianism extend Critical Rationalism fully to all known areas of thought. Testimonialism completes critical rationalism. [M]oreover, the profundity of the first paragraph is something that you probably cannot find in university philosophy departments. As far as I know, Testimonialism is a completely novel invention. And you and I are participating in the growth of something very new. Something that failed in the early 20th century, and by that failure nearly wiped out western civilization. If you learn propertarianism and testimonialism you will learn to construct proofs. And you will win arguments against the liars. The fact that I am constructing proofs, rather than asking you to accept authority or wisdom or moral appeal, is why I have such an absurdly off-kilter behavior when doing philosophy. Because I’m just taking an argument and seeing if I can construct a proof for it – just like a mathematician tries to construct a proof, and just like a computer programmers is trying to figure out if something is computable. I don’t have to act like a member of the Academy (Cathedral) because I am not lying or asking you to believe I hold moral authority. I’m a just constructing proofs. And at least proofs are truthful (warrantied testimony) even if they may not be true (complete). So Propertarianism is how we are going to win. We are going to win because when I am done it will be possible to construct moral proofs. Once we can construct moral proofs, we can create strict construction in law.  And we can convert all commons to property.  And under universal standing, protect that property. And we will eliminate lying the same way we created property and eliminated violence and theft. And the same way we created contracts and law, and eliminated fraud.  And the same way we created science and eliminated mysticism.  We will create testimonialism and eliminate rationalism, justification, equivocation, obscurantism, pseudoscience, lying, and propaganda. Fukuyama was wrong. The end of history is the truthful civilization. And we are going to birth it. And I hope that birth is painful.  🙂

  • Propertarian Arguments are Categorically Proofs.  (And a note on painful births 🙂 )

    [A] proof is a test of internal consistency. A proof is not a truth proposition. It is merely a statement of existential possibility: that by (a)the given axioms, or (b)the possible operations, and (c) the tests of subjective incentive at each opportunity for choice, that the given argument is possible. Testimonialism and Propertarianism extend Critical Rationalism fully to all known areas of thought. Testimonialism completes critical rationalism. [M]oreover, the profundity of the first paragraph is something that you probably cannot find in university philosophy departments. As far as I know, Testimonialism is a completely novel invention. And you and I are participating in the growth of something very new. Something that failed in the early 20th century, and by that failure nearly wiped out western civilization. If you learn propertarianism and testimonialism you will learn to construct proofs. And you will win arguments against the liars. The fact that I am constructing proofs, rather than asking you to accept authority or wisdom or moral appeal, is why I have such an absurdly off-kilter behavior when doing philosophy. Because I’m just taking an argument and seeing if I can construct a proof for it – just like a mathematician tries to construct a proof, and just like a computer programmers is trying to figure out if something is computable. I don’t have to act like a member of the Academy (Cathedral) because I am not lying or asking you to believe I hold moral authority. I’m a just constructing proofs. And at least proofs are truthful (warrantied testimony) even if they may not be true (complete). So Propertarianism is how we are going to win. We are going to win because when I am done it will be possible to construct moral proofs. Once we can construct moral proofs, we can create strict construction in law.  And we can convert all commons to property.  And under universal standing, protect that property. And we will eliminate lying the same way we created property and eliminated violence and theft. And the same way we created contracts and law, and eliminated fraud.  And the same way we created science and eliminated mysticism.  We will create testimonialism and eliminate rationalism, justification, equivocation, obscurantism, pseudoscience, lying, and propaganda. Fukuyama was wrong. The end of history is the truthful civilization. And we are going to birth it. And I hope that birth is painful.  🙂

  • PROPERTARIAN ARGUMENTS ARE CATEGORICALLY PROOFS A proof is a test of internal co

    PROPERTARIAN ARGUMENTS ARE CATEGORICALLY PROOFS

    A proof is a test of internal consistency. A proof is not a truth proposition. It is merely a statement of existential possibility: that by (a)the given axioms, or (b)the possible operations, and(c) the tests of subjective incentive at each opportunity for choice, that the given argument is possible.

    This extends Critical Rationalism fully to all areas of thought. Testimonialism completes critical rationalism.

    The profundity of the first paragraph is something that you probably cannot find in university philosophy departments. As far as I know, Testimonialism is a completely novel invention. And you and I are watching the growth of something very new. Something that failed in the early 20th century, and by that failure nearly wiped out western civilization.

    If you learn propertarianism and testimonialism you will construct proofs.

    The fact that I am constructing proofs, rather than asking you to accept authority or wisdom or moral appeal, is why I have such an absurdly off kilter behavior when doing philosophy.

    Because I’m just taking an argument and seeing if I can construct a proof for it – just like a mathematician tries to construct a proof, and just like a computer programmers is trying to figure out if something is computable.

    I don’t have to act like a member of the Academy (Cathedral) because I am not lying or asking you to believe nonsense. I’m a just constructing proofs. Proofs are truthful even if they may not be true (complete).

    So this is how we are going to win. We are going to win because when I am done it will be possible to construct moral proofs.

    And we will eliminate lying the same way we created property and eliminated violence and theft. And the same way we created contracts and law, and eliminated fraud.

    Fukuyama was wrong. The end of history is the truthful civilization.

    And we are going to birth it.

    And I hope that birth is painful. 🙂

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 08:45:00 UTC

  • WRITING: CASE. Look. If Popper can use Italics, then I can use Case. (Yet anothe

    WRITING: CASE.

    Look. If Popper can use Italics, then I can use Case. (Yet another thing Germans do right.).

    Proper casing of names of terms cues the reader.

    Using headlines, callouts, paragraph headlines and then bold on keywords has become common in print because it assists in helping the user scan the text to skip what he knows and find what he doesn’t.

    The purpose of punctuation is to assist in reading aloud or in the equivalent inner voice.

    And good type handling is just good indexing.

    So if you still think in antique terms you are just stuck in an obsolete technology.

    Sorry. That’s how it is.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 08:07:00 UTC

  • WHAT I’M WORKING ON NOW: THE LANGUAGE OF CRITICISM While physicists have been us

    WHAT I’M WORKING ON NOW: THE LANGUAGE OF CRITICISM

    While physicists have been using the model of “information” for decades, and while Hayek gave us the same idea in economics and social science, the use of the ‘information’ model of thought has not permeated the social science, nor the psychology of decision making.

    What I am trying to develop is the language and argument structure within Propertarianism and Testimonialism that tests whether sufficient information exists, or whether additional information is needed to provide decidability.

    Why? Because the general trend in history is that people choose to believe something (act proactively) rather than they justify their beliefs in order to seize opportunity.

    In other words, people follow incentives.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-28 04:43:00 UTC

  • SHORT COURSE ON PROPERTARIANISM’S TESTIMONIAL AND THEREFORE EXISTENTIAL TRUTH. (

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/21/a-hierarchy-of-truths/A SHORT COURSE ON PROPERTARIANISM’S TESTIMONIAL AND THEREFORE EXISTENTIAL TRUTH.

    (promoted to post) (very good outline)

    The Truth – as in the most parsimonious description we can possibly make, cannot know, even if we speak it.

    Truthfulness on the other hand, we can know.

    LIMITS: TRUTHFUL ENOUGH FOR THE CONSEQUENCES

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/21/a-hierarchy-of-truths/

    DEFINITIONS OF TRUTHFULNESS

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/05/29/definitions-truth/

    DUE DILIGENCE NECESSARY FOR THE WARRANTY OF TRUTHFULNESS

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/04/due-diligence-necessary-for-the-warranty-of-truthfulness/

    THE END OF HISTORY IS NOT DEMOCRACY BUT THE TRUTHFUL CIVILIZATION

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/06/the-end-of-history-the-truthful-civilization-sorry-francis/

    FUKUYAMA DIDN”T UNDERSTAND

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/06/13/fukuyama-didnt-understand/

    SCIENCE IS A MORAL DISCIPLINE IN WHICH WE WARRANTY THE TRUTHFULNESS OF OUR SPEECH.

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/12/23/science-is-a-moral-discipline-in-which-we-struggle-to-speak-truthfully/

    If scientists can warranty the truthfulness of their work, there is no reason the rest of us cannot do so.

    PHILOSOPHY MORALITY LAW AND SCIENCE CAN BE (AND SHOULD BE) IDENTICAL PROPOSITIONS

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/01/02/philosophy-morality-science-and-law-should-be-identical-propositions/

    WE DISCOVERED TRUTH TELLING – WE DISCOVERED TRUTH.

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/12/11/we-discovered-truth-telling-2/

    CULTURAL VARIANTS OF TRUTH

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/07/11/cultural-variants-of-truth-and-the-consequences/

    THE CURE FOR PROPAGANDA AND THE RESTORATION OF WESTERN CIVILIZATION

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/01/18/the-cure-for-propaganda-and-western-civilization/

    WE JUST LEARN WHAT WORKS: TRUTH IN DEFENSE OF THE COMMONS

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/12/23/we-never-know-anything-we-just-try-we-learn-what-works/

    THE ONLY MEANS OF ELIMINATING THE STATE AND CONSTRUCTING LIBERTY

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/04/23/the-only-means-of-eliminating-the-state-and-constructing-liberty/

    LIBERTY IS LIKE TRUTH: THERE IS ALWAYS MORE OF IT TO BE FOUND

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2014/06/14/liberty-is-like-truth/

    Curt Doolittle

    Testimonialism and Propertarianism

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-27 13:03:00 UTC

  • SATURATE THE ENVIRONMENT WITH TRUTHFULNESS – AND PEOPLE WILL ACT TRUTHFULLY (By:

    SATURATE THE ENVIRONMENT WITH TRUTHFULNESS – AND PEOPLE WILL ACT TRUTHFULLY

    (By: Curt Doolittle, Johannes Meixner and Andy Curzon)

    [W]e learn actions by doing. But we learn metaphysics by observation: our most effective learning-by-doing comes from recognizing patterns and habits of others in the environment. Things we take for granted as static, rather than open to our modification.

    So I tend to see something like programming as a skill that must be learned by doing. Some people are incapable no matter how many times they try to do something. Some people must do something many, many times. Others must do things a few times. Others just once or twice. Some of us can master concepts purely by imagining doing them a few times, and some of us by imagining the art of imagining doing them instantly. (We are very RARE.)

    We know that this progression roughy mirrors standard deviations of IQ around a ‘human minimum’ of around 106 (the start of Smart Fraction abilities: verbal articulation of ideas). And that makes sense when you realize that verbalizing complex ideas is in itself, the art of imagining operations in sequence.

    WHERE DOES THIS LEAD?

    Saturate the environment with truth and people will act truthfully.

    Saturate the environment with error the people will act erroneously.

    Saturate the environment with deception and the people will act deceptively.

    Saturate the environment with violence, and people will act violently.

    Because that is what it means to adapt to the environment..

    – Education was the first means of public broadcasting.

    – Reading was the next, but it was voluntary.

    – Radio was next and could be done without effort.

    – Television was next and it was a serotonin-producing drug, that made saturation effortless.

    – Today the curious can see confirmation and alliance in almost any alternate reality that they can imagine. In Advanced countries people live in their isolation chambers, listening to echoes.

    Saturation is the best teaching. But how do we ensure people are saturated by truths rather than falsehoods?

    We make untruthful speech a crime when placed into the commons. Deprive the environment of negativity, and people will not act negatively. And within one or two generations we will saturate people with truth.

    And as such we:

    Saturate the environment with truth and people will act truthfully.

    Saturate the environment with trust and people will act trustworthily.

    Saturate the environment with confidence and people will act confidently.

    Saturate the environment with certainty and people will act certainly. (pun!)

    Saturate the environment with assurance, and people will act assuredly.

    Saturate the environment with anything, and people will act likewise.

    So you see…. “after all, we’re all alike.”

    Education need not be interpersonal if it is environmental.

    The Propertarian Institute

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-27 11:27:00 UTC