(FB 1549469401 Timestamp) LANGUAGE AND PROPERTARIANISM (repost via @[1914180:2048:Nick Dahlheim]) “Think of the language of propertarianism like this: Humans have possibly three emotional drivers: activation-rest, pain-pleasure, dominance-submission. And on top of those three we find our big five/six personality drivers – our sensitivity to those three emotional drivers. And on top of that the rather broad cacaphony of emotions you can see in diagrams of our emotinal ranges. And on top of that the combinations of all those emotions as we react to the complex symphony of emotions we feel when we percieve the any complex thing constituted in multiple causes and consequences. But underneath all those layers is a very simple machine that wants to obtain access to a higher ratio of calories under it’s control than the cost to obtain and consume them. And it turns out that the list of things we like to collect in our inventory, so that we find security and pleasure in our condition, is fairly small. We call it ‘property in toto’: those things people act to obtain, defend, transform, trade, and consume. So, if we speak in the language of the gain or loss of property in toto, we circumvent the apparent complexity of those emotions, the lies and denials that accompany them, we can state all of human perception, cognition, knowledge, advocacy, and action as reactions to the changes in the state of their inventory – and nothing more. it only seems complex to learn to speak in causes rather than experiences. But the causes are much more simply: “what is this person attempting to acquire, or defend, and is he doing it truthfully and morally or untruthfully and immorally?” From this perspective, the argumentative power of propertarianism is so all encompassing because it relies upon first cause. But that said, it’s actually very simple compared to the arguments consisting of experiences, analogies, and deceits.” – Curt Doolittle
Category: Epistemology and Method
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549666223 Timestamp) WHAT IS A TESTIMONIAL ARGUMENT (by request) Testimonial arguments consist of deflating and disambiguating deceitful, fictional, ideal, analogical, ordinary, formal, logical, empirical, statements into complete sentences stated in operational vocabulary and grammar (eprime), that survive tests of consistency and therefore coherence in the possible dimensions of human cognition, including categorical(identity), consistency (logical), correspondence (empirical), existentially possible (operational), rational (voluntary), reciprocal (reciprocally voluntary) dimensions, scope (full accounting and limits). Any statement or set of statements or arguments that cannot be reduced to such operational vocabulary and grammar and pass such tests cannot be subject to truth claims, since the information (knowledge) necessary to testify that it is true does not exist. The purpose of this grammar, like math, formal logic, algorithmic logic, accounting, is to expose ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalisms of supernatural, ideal, and pseudoscientific), and outright deceit in claims to truth or goodness (morality) of propositions, and to prohibit such claims in commerce, finance, economics, law, politics, and the academy under law, thereby enabling the citizenry to use the negative market of the law to prosecute for profit those who engage in informational harm to the commons.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549666223 Timestamp) WHAT IS A TESTIMONIAL ARGUMENT (by request) Testimonial arguments consist of deflating and disambiguating deceitful, fictional, ideal, analogical, ordinary, formal, logical, empirical, statements into complete sentences stated in operational vocabulary and grammar (eprime), that survive tests of consistency and therefore coherence in the possible dimensions of human cognition, including categorical(identity), consistency (logical), correspondence (empirical), existentially possible (operational), rational (voluntary), reciprocal (reciprocally voluntary) dimensions, scope (full accounting and limits). Any statement or set of statements or arguments that cannot be reduced to such operational vocabulary and grammar and pass such tests cannot be subject to truth claims, since the information (knowledge) necessary to testify that it is true does not exist. The purpose of this grammar, like math, formal logic, algorithmic logic, accounting, is to expose ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, loading, framing, suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalisms of supernatural, ideal, and pseudoscientific), and outright deceit in claims to truth or goodness (morality) of propositions, and to prohibit such claims in commerce, finance, economics, law, politics, and the academy under law, thereby enabling the citizenry to use the negative market of the law to prosecute for profit those who engage in informational harm to the commons.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549752293 Timestamp) Don’t be silly. I’m wrong all the time. The whole point of argument is to discover your errors. But when it comes to what I specialize in it will be very, very, very, hard to find fault.
-
On Criticism of Working in Public “Curt: Why No Secrecy!!!”
AGAINST CRITICISM ON WORKING IN PUBLIC February 9th, 2019 POLICY:TRANSPARENCY (i.e. “CURT: WHY NO SECRECY!!!”) 1 – I do my work out in the open with my real name. I always have. 2 – I educate our people on how to produce and implement a restoration of the constitution that will allow us reclaim our destiny by constitutional amendment, and certainty of members of the state the rebellion to enact it – or to cause secession between those who do and do not wish so. 3 – I do this to provide an actionable solution that will prevent the bloodiest civil war in human history that is one spark from igniting, and one that has been deterministic since the 1965 socialist transition of immigration from kin to aliens. 4 – I NEVER EVER cross the line to advocacy or organization or participation in direct action. I seek only to make our people understand that if we did choose to revolt that our success is a virtual certainty and therefore to make the state end its denial that we would. 5 – If you cannot do the same then I can’t be associated with you, and I don’t want to. You are a danger to me and our people 6 – All ‘secret’ activity only attracts the wrong people, with the wrong incentives, to engaging in the wrong behaviors, that will end in their and our harm. 7 – All any action by the state against me as a thought leader working on restoration of the constitution to prevent its usurpation, and the creation of policies in the defense of our people from economic, cultural, and genetic predation would only serve to demonstrate to the people we seek to reach the corruption of that government, and in turn grant additional legitimacy to both the promise of my work, and the promise of our ability to force our self defense into the body of law. 8 – If we must, at some future time, act, then we must and will act toward a moral end, with an actionable plan, and all act at once. And in the interim we must constraint all lunatics from preventing our expansion into the majority and the provision of solutions for the vast majority of our people – exclusive of those fools, traitors and enemies among them. 9 – Only the more sophisticated followers understand how I use the ‘marketplace’ of the internet to criticize ideas, whittle away at them, and discover those few grains of truth therein. Only the more sophisticated followers understand how I use the king of the hill game to run those tests. At any given time I might be testing any set of ideas by king of the hill games, to get you to defeat them so that I understand how to replace those ideas with better ones. I don’t want you to understand what I am doing. If you undrestand I am playing this game, and running these tests, then their utility declines. The secret to any psychological testing is to work indirectly by appealing to people’s intuitions such that their natural tendency to signal rather than report is circumvented. This is is how I work. I create games that indirectly allow me to discover possibilities. I do not start with presumptions, I simply start with what is presumed, and attack it until only a few grains of truth remain. With those gains of truth I then reconstruct the law. What we do with that law is up to us – should we obtain the power to enforce its adoption. And I must convince you only that we both have the power, and that the laws once enacted will serve our purposes. This means that all my work was in the construction of the law, the rest is only the policy we enact by that law, and the incentives of citizens to use the law to suppress, defeat, or exit those who continue the 2500 year war against our people. Thank you for your time. -Curt Doolittle ====== FROMl: thisisnotmyemail@hotmail.com REGARDING: https://ordoevangelistarum.com/ Sir, I love your thoughts but am not happy with your boomer-tier tools. Thomas Lewis from Ordo Evangelistarum has the right ideas when it comes to implementing websites, forums, and comms. He only uses open source programs that have been rigorously tested. He is also friends with some honorable computer nerds that help him out. You use gmail. For the love of god, why? I’m not emailing you only to be flagged by the crazed technocrats at google for not thinking like them. Discord is run by a bunch of SJWs who do not share anything with you in common either. Once again, I wont be using discord. Open source alternatives like OE is using. 1) comms. Riot app using decentralized matrix servers. Thomas has his own server which he controls. I prefer servers in third world countries because why not. 2) Forum. He uses Discord which is simple and effective and once again, you control it yourself. At least use some free tools that arent made around collecting user data to sell. Other than that, my respect for you overrides any disdain I have for your boomer tech strategy. ====
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549752293 Timestamp) Don’t be silly. I’m wrong all the time. The whole point of argument is to discover your errors. But when it comes to what I specialize in it will be very, very, very, hard to find fault.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549818895 Timestamp) THE ONLY REASON TO USE A GRAMMAR OF LYING – IS TO LIE. GA = Postmodernism = Abrahamism = Sophism = Deceit. Funny how so many people accuse me of incomprehensibility, but then I CAN explain – in extremis – any of my positions, given the attention and intellectual honesty of the audience. There is nothing complex about Despotism. There is nothing complex about arguing for Despotism. There is nothing complex in that many people can be fooled by sophism, pseudoscience, supernaturalism, and false promise into temporary support of various forms of despotism. Despotism is in the interests of the underclasses always, and the elite classes, usually, but against the laboring, working, and middle classes always. It is not in anyone’s interest to pursue despotism – except those who lack merit.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549818895 Timestamp) THE ONLY REASON TO USE A GRAMMAR OF LYING – IS TO LIE. GA = Postmodernism = Abrahamism = Sophism = Deceit. Funny how so many people accuse me of incomprehensibility, but then I CAN explain – in extremis – any of my positions, given the attention and intellectual honesty of the audience. There is nothing complex about Despotism. There is nothing complex about arguing for Despotism. There is nothing complex in that many people can be fooled by sophism, pseudoscience, supernaturalism, and false promise into temporary support of various forms of despotism. Despotism is in the interests of the underclasses always, and the elite classes, usually, but against the laboring, working, and middle classes always. It is not in anyone’s interest to pursue despotism – except those who lack merit.
-
The Method to The Appearance of Madness
THE METHOD TO THE APPEARANCE OF MADNESS (An Opus for the Newbies and Normies) February 11th, 2019 0) I work through the combination of aristotelian, logical, scientific, social scientific, pedagorical-religious, and cognitive-linguistic fields with a discipline that most cannot imagine. And at any time I’m attempting to solve a handful of problems. If the audience understands what problem I am solving it does not help me with their reactions so I tend to mix them up to prevent it. 1) I ‘riff’ off arguments wherever i find them in order to create controversy in order to draw attention in order to educate those who are educable, and filter out those who are not. 2) I never resist the opportunity for a fight for this reason: it is exceptional, relatively free advertising, that lets us search for people that have potential for contribution to the development of an intellectual movement sufficient to counter second era abrahamism: destruction of advanced civilizations by islamism, judaism, marxism, postmodernism, feminism, denialism, and outright lying that baits the ignorant and foolish into moral hazard, and civilizational collapse. 3) I teach by conducting a continuous the king of the hill game, which consists of making an argument or assertion which generates either defense of a prior assumption, offense against a presumption, or conflict between assumptions. This is how men must be taught. There is no penalty for failure except one’s learning. The only reward is attention, respect, quoting, and republication of good arguments. One does not need to be ‘right’ in this game, one needs only continuously strive to improve his abilities at discourse, debate, argument, and prosecution. 4) The principle methods we teach are actually quite simple: (a) deflate, operationalize, disambiguate, serialize, define limits and completeness and express as a supply demand curve. This produces ‘better definitions, redefinitinos, and new definitions which are not possible to use in decet by the incomplete sentences, inflation, conflation, sophism, or the fictionalisms of idealism, supernaturalism, and pseudoscience. (b) All human behavior can be reduced to attempts to obtain, maintain, or defend expenditures of investment, whether physical, emotional, or intellectual. … As a consequence we can enumerate everything that humans attempt to acquire as some form of property. … As a consequence we can test whether attempts at obtaining property are reciprocal and if reciprocal within the limits of proportionality – thus maintaining the incentive to cooperate …. or they are not. if they are not then they are violations of reciprocity and proportionality, and as such simply ‘violence by other means’. Violence by any means, invites reciprocity by retaliation by violence by any means. Therefore the only reason for those who are able, to cooperate rather than exterminate, enslave, enserf, en-tax, or en-debt, is reciprocity within the limits of proportionality. (c) humans divide not only labor, but time-frame, perception, cognition, memory, paradigm, opportunities for predation and conditions of(fear of being) prey, demands, advocacy, negotiation, cooperation, rejection, conflict, and warfare. (d) there are a limited means of dividing that cognition and advocacy and those are primarily driven by gender differences in cognition and intuition, the bias of male or female brain structure and resulting behavior in the group, very minor differences in personality trait within the group (stages of the prey drive or reward system), the degree of neoteny in a group, and the success of the group in upward redistribution of reproduction thereby limiting the dead weight of the unproductive or costly. (e) Within groups there are only three means of persuasion i) force, ii)remuneration, iii) ostracization. These three strategies reflect the masculine conservative(defensive), ascendent male (opportunistic), and female(consumptive) biases in cognitive strategy. We see this in extreme conflict behavior between the genders as men fight only to preserve hierarchy then end the conflict. Ascendent men (libertarians) rarely fight but move to other opportunities. Females undermine by reputation destruction and do not stop until the enemy is destroyed. We also see this same effect in three personality type clusters. In other words all human groups cluster around three sets of personality types (big5/6) that reflect the masculine, libertarian, and feminine reproductive and social competitive strategy. This strategy is modified slightly by the sexual, social, economic, political, and military genetic, cultural, and knowledge value that the individual demonstrates by his display word and deed. and if we modify by the increasing adaptation provided by intelligence we see that there are a finite number of means by which individuals and groups compete. Therefore, all group strategies can be understood as genetic expression of group evolutionary demands. (f) Societies form elites in each of the means of coercion: i)force, government, and law, ii) finance, production, and trade, iii)education, gossip, propaganda, moralism, religion and these elites compete to make use of their strategy on behalf of their followers. They ally with one another. Traditionally religion and state. At the present it is religion and the middle class and the military (the middle) against the immigrants, minorities (non whites), underclasses (disenfranchised), and media, academy, state complex. In other words the new ‘religion’ of the academy and state is in competition with the old religion of the church, law, and people – it’s the top and bottom against the middle classes. (g) Since this new ‘religion’ is imposed upon our people by the same technique as the abrahamic religions (false promise, baiting into moral hazard, sophism, pilpul(excuse making), and critique (undermining), by a process of environmental overloading (informational saturation by repetition), that takes advantage of our genetic and cultural high trust (vulnerability to moral deception by moral hazard), and particularly because this is the natural intuition of the female biased mind out of evolutionary necessity, the increase in females in the work place, in voting, in consumption, and in particular in education in pseudosciences (social science and psychology and literature) which are simply vehicles for deceit by baiting the female mind into moral hazard, we can make use of the law to suppress falsehood, fraud, and high-fraud: baiting into moral hazard, in commerce, finance, economics, law, politics, and pedagogy (the academy), and let the natural competition between offenders and defenders incrementally suppress these frauds through the court system. and this will produce the most rapid change possible, and the costs of prosecution will, as in most things, drive the bad out of our society by negative market pressure (the law) alone, using natural self interest of even a minority of ordinary people. (h) It is quite possible using ‘testimonialism’ to define what is truthful speech (really, it is, surprisingly, and without that much difficulty) and teo extend the same involuntary (forced) warranty of due diligence against harm (falsehood, fraud, high fraud: baiting into moral hazard). (g) We have in the west relied on a unique, counter-intuitive human evolutionary strategy, evolved by our early military origins as charioteers, raiders, pirates, vikings, conquerors when we combined horse, wheel, bronze, language, and developed sky worshiping and paternalism as means of expressing our new found dominance over others and nature. However, this military order required personal investment by families in expensive equipment (arms, men) necessary to conduct raids and wars, and conquest. This order required putting TRUTH BEFORE FACE REGARDLESS OF COST TO THE HIERARCHY. Including the self. And it required relatively ‘democratic’ rights among those raiders (warriors, vikings, conquerors), who fought by choice not command. With the headman (chieftain) being the judge of last resort, and the people as the jury. As a result we produced heroism (risk) for the franchise (equality), and resulting sovereignty, reciprocity, common law, meaning the law of tort (property), and as a consequence, markets for voluntary cooperation in association, reproduction (marriage), production(economy), commons (‘society’), polity (government), and war (defense and offense), where war is another business venture like any other. And this tradition and this tradition alone – our sovereignty by earning it, our law, our militia, our jury, is all that separates us from the rest of the world that did not develop these traits. And the east asians were insulated from the barbarians by their territory, more so than we were by the Urals, black sea, caspian, bosphorus and mediterranean. So they not only had a longer time to develop, fewer genetically different neighbors, a larger population, and and the flood river alleys to feed themselves. They never developed truth over face, and because of that were not able to organize as fast and invent as fast as europeans in the ancient and modern worlds. The middle of the earth was destroyed by the semites over the past few thousand years, and their destruction and reduction of man to ignorance dysgenia, and poverty, is universal. They have destroyed and consumed the genetic, informational, normative, political, administrative, fixed, environmental capital of every great civilization of the ancient world reducing them to ashes of superstition. WHen rome discovered it must build a wall they did not choose the bosporus the caucuses, and the urals – and they should have. Because beyond there. nothing but Mordor waits. We are the people of science and law, the east are the people of reason and family, and the middle are the people of cancer upon the world that we must all defend against. (j) There are enemies among us that are not europeans and do not have our genetic and cultural dispositions, that exist (survive competition) ENTIRELY BY BAITING IN TO MORAL HAZARD and preying upon our people. We do not need to war against these people. Only outlaw their behavior in self defense. If we do so those people will have a choice of conforming, leaving, or prosecution and if necessary, execution. These people specialize in Advertising, Finance, Media, Entertainment, Propaganda, Activism, Law, Government, Prostitution, Gambling, Pornograpy, and white collar crime. And they do so by immigration, undermining, baiting into moral hazard, profiting from it, investing in the privatization of commons (rent seeking), and sponsoring further immigration, conversion, and destruction of all we have spent 4000 years developing. We can end the 2000 year war against our people very easily. A moral license (predation upon us, extermination of us) A set of demands (new constitution and policies) A plan of transition (how to reorganize peacefully) A means of altering the status quo. (uprising to delegitimize the state.) It is hard for people to argue with definancialization, de politicization, de propagandism, de population replacement, and the total criminalization of lying, fraud, and high fraud against our people in matters commercial, financial, political, economic, and military. We must choose. At least. The answer is about two million of us must choose. And we must choose to pay the price of defense of our people from the current attacks on our civilization. We can easily win. It’s just a choice. 5) I am, we are, creating a movement the size and scope of marxism and postmodernism precisely to counter the use of semitic abrahamism version two, against our people in the forms of the great deceits of baiting into moral hazard: boazianism, freudianism, marxism, socialism, keynesianism, postmodernism, denialism, and outright lying; the destruction of our rule of law, of our constitution of natural law, and our civilization nearly devoid of burdensome underclasses that must of necessity parasitically depend upon us just as the utility of unskilled labor, skilled labor, clerks, craftsmen, are being eliminated from the economic pool. I’m searching for the members of our equivalent of the ‘frankfurt school’ – the development of our arguments of Restoration. All I care about from the Libertarians, Traditionalists, Constitutionalists , and Religious, is to i) not impede our work ii) be willing if the time comes to raise the few million we need to bring this entire country to a halt in short order, such that once published, our demands are met without bloodshed. ii) BEcause while you don’t understand, and I do, the ability to starve tens of millions of our enemies and turn their island cities to ruin is about as difficult as having a sandwich and beer. Thanks for your time and attention.The gods, all of them, are with us. Because only a devil would leave behind so many dead gods, and so many dead people, a genetic wasteland, and the attempted reversal of human history back into the stone ages. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine (and really…now we are everywhere) Please start a group in your area. Winning is easy once you know how to win and what to do once you’ve won.
-
Curt Doolittle updated his status.
(FB 1549908672 Timestamp) THE MARKET FOR DECIDABILITY When the ordinary person fails he appeals to associates. When associates fail he appeals to superiors When superiors fail he appeals to professionals When professionals fail the appeals to thought leaders. When instincts fail we appeal to familial ethics. When familial ethics fail we appeal to virtue ethics. When virtue ethics fail we appeal to rule ethics When rule ethics fail we appeal to outcome ethics. When intuition fails one must appeal to logic. When logic fails, one must appeal to empiricism. When empiricism fails one must appeal to operationalism. When operationalism fails one must appeal to limits scope and parsimony. When religion fails, one appeals to reason When reason fails one appeals to philosophy When philosophy fails, on appeals to science When science fails, one appeals to testimony. And the opposite is true. Why? We only have so much knowledge, and so much time, to satisfy the market for decidability in time for taking action.
- Curt Doolittle
- The Propertarian Institute.
PS by Bill Joslin Incremental Disambiguation in one direction (from low to high investment)- Graceful failure in the other (from high to low cost) which explains why the later presents stronger incentives than the former.z