Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • Lying (a tort): intention to deceive, or failure of due diligence against ignora

    Lying (a tort): intention to deceive, or failure of due diligence against ignorance error bias or deceit by testimony by realism, naturalism, identity, internal consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, rational, reciprocal, limited, complete, warrantied.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-14 01:01:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1338287859476869121

    Reply addressees: @anzarmlateef @AlSisiAnswers

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1338286780177657857

  • RT @ThruTheHayes: Command reciprocity: it’s your favorite. People suffer more du

    RT @ThruTheHayes: Command reciprocity: it’s your favorite.

    People suffer more due to non-action in this world of option paralysis than the…


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-12 21:36:04 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337873879658876933

  • RT @ThruTheHayes: TRUMP’S FAVORITE WORD: RECIPROCITY; HIS BIGGEST CONCERN: SOVER

    RT @ThruTheHayes: TRUMP’S FAVORITE WORD: RECIPROCITY; HIS BIGGEST CONCERN: SOVEREIGNTY

    You can connect the dots I’m sure. He’s not perfect…


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-12 21:35:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337873774075650049

  • General We are counting on you. You have no idea how many of us will answer your

    General
    We are counting on you. You have no idea how many of us will answer your call. We do. We are the ‘court’ of last resort. We’re the final insurer of rule of law by the natural law of our constitution – the greatest political innovation in history. We’re … ‘anxious’.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-12 01:09:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337565315434225666

    Reply addressees: @GenFlynn @tracybeanz @SidneyPowell1 @abigailcfrye @jbinnall @LLinWood @marklevinshow @MariaBartiromo @JudgeJeanine @realDonaldTrump

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337564735722631168

  • Our traditional law limited us to ethical competition in markets and ethical com

    Our traditional law limited us to ethical competition in markets and ethical competition in court, or ethical competition in duel. We were forbidden unethical competition: defamation, dishonest speech, disinformation,

    It’s possible to restore it because of P-law


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-11 22:58:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337532199286026245

    Reply addressees: @NRxAuthors

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337531428058390530

  • 2. Any injury must be compensated according to the damage done, regardless of mo

    2. Any injury must be compensated according to the damage done, regardless of motive or intent. (ie: Law = Tort = Natural Law) Lighter offenses required damages, paid in part to the victim and in part to the king.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-11 21:23:38 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337508364880908289

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337508363777822722


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    1. Germanic peoples of the 1st century, Minor legal disputes were settled on a day-to-day basis by elected chiefs assisted by elected officials, and criminal cases put before the thing. The Thing, used the law and heard witnesses to rule whether the accused was guilty or not.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1337508363777822722

  • There is a vast difference between attention seeking, cult seeking, rejection or

    There is a vast difference between attention seeking, cult seeking, rejection or self loathing, and sedition, treason, against the laws of the universe, including the physical law of scarcity, natural law of reciprocity,and evolutionary law of regression to the mean and dysgenia.


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-11 15:28:52 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337419083109765123

    Reply addressees: @Quillette

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1337383633418661889

  • HOW DOES P-LAW WORK? A short answer to a very big question

    HOW DOES P-LAW WORK?
    A short answer to a very big question:

    https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/12/09/q-curt-how-do-you-use-p-law-to-evaluate-the-credibility-of-points-of-view/ https://t.co/XmdycjSzs0


    Source date (UTC): 2020-12-09 23:02:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1336808573955928064

  • Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    This response answers the question – if you can understand it: 1) Non-Warranty (blame): a point of view constitutes an opinion in the absence of due diligence, which one is unwilling to warranty – an admission of ignorance, or a pretense of argument (deceit). 2) Warranty(blame): an argument constitutes a claim of undecidability, the possibility of truth, or falsehood which one is willing to warranty – a claim of knowledge, or a pretense of knowledge(deceit) 3) Truth or Falsehood: You can only make a truth claim if you can testify to it. And we can test whether you can Testify to it. And whether your Testimony is consistent under realism, naturalism, identity, internal consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, rational choice, reciprocity in rational choice, with stated limits, full accounting within them, and parsimonious survival of competition against the market for alternatives. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can testify and therefore claim true. 4) Criminality: Furthermore, we can test means, motive, the opportunity for crimes by the test of Reciprocity: productive, exhaustively informed, voluntary transfer, warrantied for due diligence and within the limits of restitutability, to be free of imposition of costs against the demonstrated interests of others by externality. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can conduct crimes. 5) Completeness: By these two tests Reciprocity, and Testimony within Reciprocity, we can determine the undecidability, truth candidacy, or falsehood of any claim of testimony. 6) Measurement: The formal operational logic of analysis is called operationalism, and the principle technique is constructing systems of measurement out of language, by enumeration and disambiguation by serialization. Then fully expanding sentences into promissory, operational, complete, transactions absent the pretense of knowledge of the verb to be. 7) Systems of Measurement: We have formalized all speech into a table we call The Grammars, that disambiguates deflationary, normal, and inflationary speech into the full set of techniques from logic and math ant one and to normal speech in the center, to lies at the other end. 8) Systems of Deceit: We have formalized the techniques of deceit with equal depth, but I don’t feel like typing that much here because as in all things the means of falsehood are nearly infinite while the means of truth is nearly singular. 9) Learning the P-Law methodology is like learning three years of programming, economics, and law simultaneously, it takes a +130 IQ with education in the physical sciences, and basic familiarity with economics about six months, and talented people about three years.  What does that mean? It means you’re probably overloaded with my answer. But this particular answer ends philosophy and completes the scientific method and the aristotelian project, and the five thousand years of evolution of european civilization’s nearly exclusive, gradual, discovery, adaptation to, and application of the formal (logical), physical, behavioral(natural), and evolutionary laws of the universe. OnlineDummies Version (in progress) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2019/11/10/p-for-dummies/Truthhttps://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Truth Reciprocityhttps://propertarianinstitute.com/the-book/reciprocity/Lies(Deceits)https://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Deceits Short Definition of Abrahamic Method of Deceit (female strategy of undermining): https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/the-definition-of-abrahamism-2/

  • Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    Q: Curt: “How Do You Use P-Law To Evaluate the “Credibility” of Points of View”

    This response answers the question – if you can understand it: 1) Non-Warranty (blame): a point of view constitutes an opinion in the absence of due diligence, which one is unwilling to warranty – an admission of ignorance, or a pretense of argument (deceit). 2) Warranty(blame): an argument constitutes a claim of undecidability, the possibility of truth, or falsehood which one is willing to warranty – a claim of knowledge, or a pretense of knowledge(deceit) 3) Truth or Falsehood: You can only make a truth claim if you can testify to it. And we can test whether you can Testify to it. And whether your Testimony is consistent under realism, naturalism, identity, internal consistency, operational possibility, external correspondence, rational choice, reciprocity in rational choice, with stated limits, full accounting within them, and parsimonious survival of competition against the market for alternatives. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can testify and therefore claim true. 4) Criminality: Furthermore, we can test means, motive, the opportunity for crimes by the test of Reciprocity: productive, exhaustively informed, voluntary transfer, warrantied for due diligence and within the limits of restitutability, to be free of imposition of costs against the demonstrated interests of others by externality. This suite of tests consists of the full set of dimensions to which humans can conduct crimes. 5) Completeness: By these two tests Reciprocity, and Testimony within Reciprocity, we can determine the undecidability, truth candidacy, or falsehood of any claim of testimony. 6) Measurement: The formal operational logic of analysis is called operationalism, and the principle technique is constructing systems of measurement out of language, by enumeration and disambiguation by serialization. Then fully expanding sentences into promissory, operational, complete, transactions absent the pretense of knowledge of the verb to be. 7) Systems of Measurement: We have formalized all speech into a table we call The Grammars, that disambiguates deflationary, normal, and inflationary speech into the full set of techniques from logic and math ant one and to normal speech in the center, to lies at the other end. 8) Systems of Deceit: We have formalized the techniques of deceit with equal depth, but I don’t feel like typing that much here because as in all things the means of falsehood are nearly infinite while the means of truth is nearly singular. 9) Learning the P-Law methodology is like learning three years of programming, economics, and law simultaneously, it takes a +130 IQ with education in the physical sciences, and basic familiarity with economics about six months, and talented people about three years.  What does that mean? It means you’re probably overloaded with my answer. But this particular answer ends philosophy and completes the scientific method and the aristotelian project, and the five thousand years of evolution of european civilization’s nearly exclusive, gradual, discovery, adaptation to, and application of the formal (logical), physical, behavioral(natural), and evolutionary laws of the universe. OnlineDummies Version (in progress) https://propertarianinstitute.com/2019/11/10/p-for-dummies/Truthhttps://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Truth Reciprocityhttps://propertarianinstitute.com/the-book/reciprocity/Lies(Deceits)https://propertarianinstitute.com > Main Menu > Methodology > On Deceits Short Definition of Abrahamic Method of Deceit (female strategy of undermining): https://propertarianinstitute.com/2020/05/31/the-definition-of-abrahamism-2/