(core) Metaphysics: Realism, naturalism, operationalism, empiricism, survival, compatibilism, cooperation, propertarianism, acquisitionism, action.Ontology: realism/naturalism, soft determinism, three faculties: physical, intuitionistic, and mind as motion(no name for it in philosophical terms: experience consists of continuous recursive hierarchical temporal memory – memory of memory continuously constructed by continuous prediction from sequences of sense perception.) the problem is getting people from the observer to perception consisting of change (action) not state. Grammars: As far as I can tell The Grammars (which you don’t know yet) produce the most parsimonious paradigm. Philosophy considers ideals, rarely if ever costs, means of production(models), possibilities(consequences and externalities). Operationalism: testimony in operational terms (one continuous consistent commensurable system of falsifiable measurement) Science: testimony in empirical terms (observation of demonstrated evidence) expressed in a commensurable terms (operational). Epistemology: Competition between justification(hypothesis), operation(theory) and empiricism(evidence) at increasing scales (self-reason via positiva-justification, via-negativa and via-positiva-tests, via-negativa market survival) Truthfulness: Due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, deceit, in performative, promissory testimony in complete sentences that are consistent, correspondent, operational, limited, complete, and coherent. Axiology: value: acquisitionism: acquisition of property in toto defined by demonstrated interest (IOW self reported values never reflect demonstrated preference, and demonstrated preference can always be expressed as acquisition of property in toto -a gain yielding a fully commensurable system of measurement), Ethics: Reciprocity – via negativa, all ethnical and moral questions are decidable by tests of fully accounted reciprocity. Sociology: Compatibilism, Tripartism, Trifunctionalism. Cooperationism(Economics): Returns on Time in a division of labor. In other words: I’m describing economics. Which, as others have stated before me, appears to function as the union of the disciplines. PHILOSOPHY SUPERSEDED BY SCIENCEPhilosophy: Do we think philosophy produces Truth, Meaning, or Choice? As far as I can tell Law, Economics, Science, Mathematics, and the human logical facility (differences in constant relations) produce testimony. So what is the remaining function of philosophy? Reorganization of preferences and means of achieving them given the truth we have identified with “science in toto”: (law, economics, science, math, logical facility). In other words, discovery of truth (science) selection of preference (philosophy), sedation or abandonment (theology). Which makes sense to me since Math(measurement) Science(matter) and Economics(people) produce evidence, law produces testimony and decidability independent of preference, and philosophy produces preference, and as far as I can tell theology allows people to escape the work of philosophy, law, and science – leading to graceful failure as our knowledge and ability decreases from science to norm or law, to philosophy, to theology. Philosophy served as the stage between unorganized thinking and science, and that anything that still in philosophy that had any value in decidability has been replaced by science and scientific epistemology. Metaphysics: Replaced by Paradigms and grammars Paradigms consisting of market for parsimony. Parsimony consisting of Action. Action consisting of Actionable, Testifiable, Warrantable, Free of Incentive to Deceive. Consisting of: Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Rational Choice, Reciprocity, full accounting. Humans have developed a series of paradigms that deflate inflate, or fictionalize the most parsimonious but complete paradigm (above). In P we call these the ‘grammars’. (You can search our site for the grammars). Humans possess the ability to determine constant and inconstant relations (differences). And to control the use of their detection of differences. We call this ability reason when used informally. We call comparisons of sets as means of testing constant relations ‘logic’. We have produced many logics. Mathematics is the most basic – consisting of one constant relation: position. In the discipline of logic we test rules of inference. However, logic isn’t closed and so all logic al assertions are contingent.As such all non-trivial logic is falsificationary. ALL of the grammars are logics of increasing tests of constant relations within different limits. Epistemology: Replaced by Theory. Free association(falsify by reason) > hypothesis(falsify by action) > theory (falsify by market) > law (falsify by limits- or ‘exhaustion’ if you prefer) Truth: Replaced by Testimony (categorically, internally, operationally, externally, rational, reciprocal Ethics: replaced by Reciprocity ((productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer free of …) Politics: Rule of law, professional judiciary, monarchy as judge of last resort, houses for classes for markets of commons, mixed economy, soft demonstrated (market) eugenics, direction of savings to the production of commons. Strategy: most rapid adaptability (rate of evolution) Aesthetics: Transcendence (Evolution) Those are are all decidable propositions (Truths). That does not mean that one cannot express or a group cannot express different preferences. It’s hard to accept but philosophy in the pursuit of truth has ended. All philosophy can tell us is choice (preference) because preferences are not true. Philosophy as a method of moral fictionalism survives in Europe. Philosophy as propaganda sophistry and deceit exists everywhere. But truth and decidability have been usurped entirely by science: testimony. This is why philosophy departments are now included with religion in libraries and in academic budgets.
Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity
-
Quick Translation Between Philosophy and Propertarianism (Natural Law)
(core) Metaphysics: Realism, naturalism, operationalism, empiricism, survival, compatibilism, cooperation, propertarianism, acquisitionism, action.Ontology: realism/naturalism, soft determinism, three faculties: physical, intuitionistic, and mind as motion(no name for it in philosophical terms: experience consists of continuous recursive hierarchical temporal memory – memory of memory continuously constructed by continuous prediction from sequences of sense perception.) the problem is getting people from the observer to perception consisting of change (action) not state. Grammars: As far as I can tell The Grammars (which you don’t know yet) produce the most parsimonious paradigm. Philosophy considers ideals, rarely if ever costs, means of production(models), possibilities(consequences and externalities). Operationalism: testimony in operational terms (one continuous consistent commensurable system of falsifiable measurement) Science: testimony in empirical terms (observation of demonstrated evidence) expressed in a commensurable terms (operational). Epistemology: Competition between justification(hypothesis), operation(theory) and empiricism(evidence) at increasing scales (self-reason via positiva-justification, via-negativa and via-positiva-tests, via-negativa market survival) Truthfulness: Due diligence against ignorance, error, bias, deceit, in performative, promissory testimony in complete sentences that are consistent, correspondent, operational, limited, complete, and coherent. Axiology: value: acquisitionism: acquisition of property in toto defined by demonstrated interest (IOW self reported values never reflect demonstrated preference, and demonstrated preference can always be expressed as acquisition of property in toto -a gain yielding a fully commensurable system of measurement), Ethics: Reciprocity – via negativa, all ethnical and moral questions are decidable by tests of fully accounted reciprocity. Sociology: Compatibilism, Tripartism, Trifunctionalism. Cooperationism(Economics): Returns on Time in a division of labor. In other words: I’m describing economics. Which, as others have stated before me, appears to function as the union of the disciplines. PHILOSOPHY SUPERSEDED BY SCIENCEPhilosophy: Do we think philosophy produces Truth, Meaning, or Choice? As far as I can tell Law, Economics, Science, Mathematics, and the human logical facility (differences in constant relations) produce testimony. So what is the remaining function of philosophy? Reorganization of preferences and means of achieving them given the truth we have identified with “science in toto”: (law, economics, science, math, logical facility). In other words, discovery of truth (science) selection of preference (philosophy), sedation or abandonment (theology). Which makes sense to me since Math(measurement) Science(matter) and Economics(people) produce evidence, law produces testimony and decidability independent of preference, and philosophy produces preference, and as far as I can tell theology allows people to escape the work of philosophy, law, and science – leading to graceful failure as our knowledge and ability decreases from science to norm or law, to philosophy, to theology. Philosophy served as the stage between unorganized thinking and science, and that anything that still in philosophy that had any value in decidability has been replaced by science and scientific epistemology. Metaphysics: Replaced by Paradigms and grammars Paradigms consisting of market for parsimony. Parsimony consisting of Action. Action consisting of Actionable, Testifiable, Warrantable, Free of Incentive to Deceive. Consisting of: Realism, Naturalism, Operationalism, Rational Choice, Reciprocity, full accounting. Humans have developed a series of paradigms that deflate inflate, or fictionalize the most parsimonious but complete paradigm (above). In P we call these the ‘grammars’. (You can search our site for the grammars). Humans possess the ability to determine constant and inconstant relations (differences). And to control the use of their detection of differences. We call this ability reason when used informally. We call comparisons of sets as means of testing constant relations ‘logic’. We have produced many logics. Mathematics is the most basic – consisting of one constant relation: position. In the discipline of logic we test rules of inference. However, logic isn’t closed and so all logic al assertions are contingent.As such all non-trivial logic is falsificationary. ALL of the grammars are logics of increasing tests of constant relations within different limits. Epistemology: Replaced by Theory. Free association(falsify by reason) > hypothesis(falsify by action) > theory (falsify by market) > law (falsify by limits- or ‘exhaustion’ if you prefer) Truth: Replaced by Testimony (categorically, internally, operationally, externally, rational, reciprocal Ethics: replaced by Reciprocity ((productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer free of …) Politics: Rule of law, professional judiciary, monarchy as judge of last resort, houses for classes for markets of commons, mixed economy, soft demonstrated (market) eugenics, direction of savings to the production of commons. Strategy: most rapid adaptability (rate of evolution) Aesthetics: Transcendence (Evolution) Those are are all decidable propositions (Truths). That does not mean that one cannot express or a group cannot express different preferences. It’s hard to accept but philosophy in the pursuit of truth has ended. All philosophy can tell us is choice (preference) because preferences are not true. Philosophy as a method of moral fictionalism survives in Europe. Philosophy as propaganda sophistry and deceit exists everywhere. But truth and decidability have been usurped entirely by science: testimony. This is why philosophy departments are now included with religion in libraries and in academic budgets.
-
Thinking Things Thru Is Scary
—“Faith without works is dead.”—John Brennan —“Faith without works is free riding. It’s a crime. ;)”—Curt Doolittle —“Faith without works is: 1 – Baiting into hazard for oneself in both religious and logical terms, 2 – Making an unfalsifiable promise to the commons (i.e believe in Jesus and be saved in afterlife), 3 – Parasitism on others within the higher-trust group of other faithful All of which are violations of reciprocity. Even though faith attempts to define reciprocity as “Do unto others as you would have them do unto you” it lacks the grammar to break it down to what it really means and how to apply it. P. solves that problem.”—James Dmitro Makienko
-
Definition of Morality, Moral
Definition of Morality, Moral https://propertarianism.com/2020/02/25/definition-of-morality-moral/
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-25 17:30:59 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232357334812418049
-
Definition of Morality, Moral
(core)
Morality = Reciprocity
Reciprocity = limiting our display word and deed to productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality to the action, and warrantied within the limits of the actors’ capacity for restitution, between those who demonstrate, promise, imply, or expect exchange of reciprocity. As far as I know, that is the logical, empirical, biologically necessary, genetically necessary and complete definition of morality, for conscious beings, and there are no cases under which the definition fails. Some people will try to conflate the moral and the good, where good consists of an additional investment in addition to not violating reciprocity – but this demands involuntary transfer from others, and violates reciprocity. Some people will try to demand involuntary exchange of a promise of reciprocity from those who do not offer it – but an enemy is nothing more than an enemy who will not engage in reciprocity. Some people will argue this is a binary condition rather than an agreement, under which we match their level of reciprocity and irreciprocity. But while we seek perfect reciprocity, we rarely obtain it. In international trade and in politics we all but never obtain reciprocity, instead we exchange selective reciprocities and irreciprocities within our tolerance for continued cooperation, boycott, or war. Some people will try to demand reciprocity in war between groups, between whom the exchange of reciprocity has been withdrawn, but this demand violates reciprocity. Humans demonstrate the minimum morality that they can get away with without provoking altruistic punishment from others. Humans possess extraordinary abilities of accounting for debts and credits with others, our relative status, status differences, and the tendency of people to engage in moral or immoral behavior.
-
Definition of Morality, Moral
(core)
Morality = Reciprocity
Reciprocity = limiting our display word and deed to productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality to the action, and warrantied within the limits of the actors’ capacity for restitution, between those who demonstrate, promise, imply, or expect exchange of reciprocity. As far as I know, that is the logical, empirical, biologically necessary, genetically necessary and complete definition of morality, for conscious beings, and there are no cases under which the definition fails. Some people will try to conflate the moral and the good, where good consists of an additional investment in addition to not violating reciprocity – but this demands involuntary transfer from others, and violates reciprocity. Some people will try to demand involuntary exchange of a promise of reciprocity from those who do not offer it – but an enemy is nothing more than an enemy who will not engage in reciprocity. Some people will argue this is a binary condition rather than an agreement, under which we match their level of reciprocity and irreciprocity. But while we seek perfect reciprocity, we rarely obtain it. In international trade and in politics we all but never obtain reciprocity, instead we exchange selective reciprocities and irreciprocities within our tolerance for continued cooperation, boycott, or war. Some people will try to demand reciprocity in war between groups, between whom the exchange of reciprocity has been withdrawn, but this demand violates reciprocity. Humans demonstrate the minimum morality that they can get away with without provoking altruistic punishment from others. Humans possess extraordinary abilities of accounting for debts and credits with others, our relative status, status differences, and the tendency of people to engage in moral or immoral behavior.
-
What has Trump suggested that I (we) don’t suggest? P (Propertarianism) is stric
What has Trump suggested that I (we) don’t suggest?
P (Propertarianism) is strictly constructed natural law of reciprocity(morality) and testimony (truth), that in turn, explains the success of western civilization. It’s no more of a pipe dream than european civilization.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-24 20:20:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1232037561641635841
Reply addressees: @StandUniteFight @StefanMolyneux
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231800422966403072
-
Seriously. Take any given libertarian position and try to figure out how it’s vi
Seriously. Take any given libertarian position and try to figure out how it’s violating reciprocity by baiting into hazard.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-23 14:19:00 UTC
-
DEFINITION OF MORALITY Morality = Reciprocity Reciprocity = limiting our display
DEFINITION OF MORALITY
Morality = Reciprocity
Reciprocity = limiting our display word and deed to productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality to the action, and warrantied within the limits of the actors’ capacity for restitution, between those who demonstrate, promise, imply, or expect exchange of reciprocity.
As far as I know, that is the logical, empirical, biologically necessary, genetically necessary and complete definition of morality, for conscious beings, and there are no cases under which the definition fails.
Some people will try to conflate the moral and the good, where good consists of an additional investment in addition to not violating reciprocity – but this demands involuntary transfer from others, and violates reciprocity.
Some people will try to demand involuntary exchange of a promise of reciprocity from those who do not offer it – but an enemy is nothing more than an enemy who will not engage in reciprocity.
Some people will argue this is a binary condition rather than an agreement, under which we match their level of reciprocity and irreciprocity. But while we seek perfect reciprocity, we rarely obtain it. In international trade and in politics we all but never obtain reciprocity, instead we exchange selective reciprocities and irreciprocities within our tolerance for continued cooperation, boycott, or war.
Some people will try to demand reciprocity in war between groups, between whom the exchange of reciprocity has been withdrawn, but this demand violates reciprocity.
Humans demonstrate the minimum morality that they can get away with without provoking altruistic punishment from others.
Humans possess extraordinary abilities of accounting for debts and credits with others, our relative status, status differences, and the tendency of people to engage in moral or immoral behavior.
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-23 07:02:00 UTC
-
MARKET DEMAND FOR MORALS by Zack Neuberger Bell curves in everything Look at pri
MARKET DEMAND FOR MORALS
by Zack Neuberger
Bell curves in everything Look at prisons: when forced into shared space, a hierarchy, and without firearms, even IQ 85s understand reciprocity, imposition of cost, and free-riding.
The low cost off irreciprocal interactions in free society allows them to disregard it in free society as they have little reason not to.
-The demand for morals
Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 11:52:00 UTC