Curt Doolittle

Category: Epistemology and Method

  • DEFINING EXISTENCE VERSUS EXPERIENCE Existence = Persistence Experience = Non-Pe

    DEFINING EXISTENCE VERSUS EXPERIENCE

    Existence = Persistence

    Experience = Non-Persistence

    1) We must construct experiences in real time from a combination of brain structure (Vitruvianism), Memory(prior Perception and Association), and Perception(senses), and Association (the measure of which we have no means yet other than IQ to determine).

    2) Existence persists independent of experience.

    3) Some patterns (categories, relations, values) will always be experienced by human minds.

    4) Human minds are indifferent in perception to the degree patterns are indifferently identified.

    5) Cooperation is possible because of indifference in perception, indifference in incentives (acquisitions), and indifference in mirroring (sympathy and empathy).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-11 13:48:00 UTC

  • Defining Existence Versus Experience

    Existence = Persistence Experience = Non-Persistence 1) We must construct experiences in real time from a combination of brain structure (Vitruvianism), Memory(prior Perception and Association), and Perception(senses), and Association (the measure of which we have no means yet other than IQ to determine). 2) Existence persists independent of experience. 3) Some patterns (categories, relations, values) will always be experienced by human minds. 4) Human minds are indifferent in perception to the degree patterns are indifferently identified. 5) Cooperation is possible because of indifference in perception, indifference in incentives (acquisitions), and indifference in mirroring (sympathy and empathy).

  • Defining Existence Versus Experience

    Existence = Persistence Experience = Non-Persistence 1) We must construct experiences in real time from a combination of brain structure (Vitruvianism), Memory(prior Perception and Association), and Perception(senses), and Association (the measure of which we have no means yet other than IQ to determine). 2) Existence persists independent of experience. 3) Some patterns (categories, relations, values) will always be experienced by human minds. 4) Human minds are indifferent in perception to the degree patterns are indifferently identified. 5) Cooperation is possible because of indifference in perception, indifference in incentives (acquisitions), and indifference in mirroring (sympathy and empathy).

  • HOW REAL ARE YOU? Can you even speak without idealism, mysticism and conflation?

    HOW REAL ARE YOU?

    Can you even speak without idealism, mysticism and conflation? You probably don’t know the extent of your infection by the language of deception.

    Why? Speaking existentially removes the illusion of ad therefore pretense of, knowledge.

    There isn’t a big difference between “feels” and “ideals”.

    The difference is between reals and *everything else* including ideals and feels.

    || Measurement > Real > Analogy > Ideal > Mysticism > Lie.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-11 13:07:00 UTC

  • How Real Are You?

    Can you even speak without idealism, mysticism and conflation? You probably don’t know the extent of your infection by the language of deception. Why? Speaking existentially removes the illusion of ad therefore pretense of, knowledge. There isn’t a big difference between “feels” and “ideals”. The difference is between reals and *everything else* including ideals and feels. || Measurement > Real > Analogy > Ideal > Mysticism > Lie.

  • How Real Are You?

    Can you even speak without idealism, mysticism and conflation? You probably don’t know the extent of your infection by the language of deception. Why? Speaking existentially removes the illusion of ad therefore pretense of, knowledge. There isn’t a big difference between “feels” and “ideals”. The difference is between reals and *everything else* including ideals and feels. || Measurement > Real > Analogy > Ideal > Mysticism > Lie.

  • FOR NEW FRIENDS I don’t care about your race, ethnicity, language or culture. Bu

    FOR NEW FRIENDS

    I don’t care about your race, ethnicity, language or culture.

    But I am a prosecutor of ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking suggestion, obscurantism, fictionalism and deceit. In particular I prosecute pseudoscience, philosophy and religion. And in particular I prosecute abrahamic religions as the worst crime of human history (judaism, christianity, and islam).

    My opinion, which I think is about as well informed as is possible, is that science is a universal language of truthful speech; reciprocity is a universal ethic; nationalism is an extension of the family and the optimum social order;

    My opinion is that the only meaningful differences between the races, subraces, and tribes, is the size of our underclasses, our degree of neoteny, and our degree of sexual dimorphism.

    And that we can all transcend into the gods we imagine if we practice truth, reciprocity, nationalism, and a gentle reduction of the size of our underclasses.

    But to do so we must rebel against, disempower, and replace all leadership that uses the top and the bottom against the middle, instead of the middle to constrain the top and the bottom.

    Any man who will fight with me shall be my brother.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-01 13:55:00 UTC

  • Propertarianism isn’t a panacea. It’s not an ideology. It’s not even a philosoph

    Propertarianism isn’t a panacea. It’s not an ideology. It’s not even a philosophy per se. It’s just “Here is the completed scientific method. If I apply the completed scientific method to the full scope of human knowledge, organized by combining categories of philosophy and social science into a single hierarchy, the result is *all of these ideas*.”

    Everything else I do is just (a) generating conflict so that I can (b) test it in argument, (c) identify a few smart people with long term potential, (d) generate marketing interest for the published work and courses. With the ambition of funding the institute and teaching natural law as a discipline. (and creating a revolution if possible).

    Right now I’m just in book mode. Although every day or so I come up with some little nuance that I have to peck away at. But it’s going really fast and it’s beautiful (at least, from my nerdy perspective.)

    And as michael said, the word-to-idea ratio is really low, so there is a lot of bang in every chapter so to speak.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-01 13:46:00 UTC

  • DON’T BE STUPID. Look. Do you understand Locke/Smith/Hume? What about Kant/Marx?

    DON’T BE STUPID.

    Look. Do you understand Locke/Smith/Hume? What about Kant/Marx? Or Darwin/Menger/Spencer/Nietzche? The history of epistemology? Or Hayek/Popper/Turing? Do you understand the foundations of mathematics, logic, economics? Do you understand the limits of logic and mathematics? What about cognitive science, and experimental psychology? What about the history and logic of the common law? Do you understand comparative institutional, economic, and demographic history? If you do, do you understand one of those series? Two of them, or all of them?

    Of course you don’t. You’re a normal person. You’re probably a smart normal person. You might even be a smart well read person. But its nearly impossible to master all of those fields sufficiently to identify how to reform them so that they operate scientifically.

    But why the hell, if you don’t understand ALL of those disciplines, do you think you’re going to understand my work in Propertarianism without some serious effort over more than a year? I mean, I cover the *entire* spectrum from metaphysics to aesthetics. Everything. ALL OF IT.

    You won’t reduce my work to a single idea that you can easily understand, because the central idea is the completion of the scientific method using testimonial truth – which itself is something you can spend a couple of years thinking about all on its own.

    Learning propertarianism is pretty similar to learning law. It requires at least the same intellectual capacity, and at least the same amount of work *UNLESS* you have already been very lucky in life or born with precisely the right combination of personality traits.

    And it turns out that some people are smart enough or lucky enough that they can both identify patterns of problems it solves, and learn it more quickly because they’ve had the experience or the raw intellectual talent. But those people are few and far between.

    So don’t be a dork. Learn what you can. Learn what you can use. If this was easy someone would have been done by now. It’s a really, really hard problem and some of the greatest minds of the last century didn’t solve it. And the problem has been around for at least 2500 years.

    Truth is enough. But understanding what that means might take a long time. Which is why its so important to institutionalize these ideas. Because it’s far better to learn them environmentally then have to learn to CORRECT the errors of thought and RELEARN what truth means – and relearn the entire spectrum of knowledge in new terms.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-01 12:15:00 UTC

  • “Even if we start from merely logic, if you wish to describe how something actua

    —“Even if we start from merely logic, if you wish to describe how something actually functions, you must speak operationally about it, as if you speak non-operationally about it, you by definition cannot describe the actual change that functionally occurs.

    Now, if you want to describe something to me that doesn’t function, that doesn’t change, and therefore doesn’t influence anything that does (as influence itself operates as a function).. Then sure, you don’t need to speak operationally, but you also aren’t talking about anything relevant to anything else, and you definitely aren’t describing anything you perceive, as perception itself operates as a function.”—Jöl Davis

    Source date (UTC): 2017-09-01 08:57:00 UTC