Curt Doolittle

Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • Property May Be Intangible but The Costs of It Are Not

    October 20th, 2018 9:49 AM

    PROPERTY MAY BE INTANGIBLE BUT THE COSTS OF IT ARE NOT —“Intangible property exists inside the realms of both personal and group property. Intangible property exists in ideas or information which men are willing to defend, such as a man’s reputation, or the reputation of a man’s family or ancestors. These things may not be tangible in such that you can point at or identify them, but they exist as property because men are willing to defend them with violence, often times even more so than the more tangible types of property.”— Allen Freeman via Oliver Westcott

  • Property May Be Intangible but The Costs of It Are Not

    October 20th, 2018 9:49 AM

    PROPERTY MAY BE INTANGIBLE BUT THE COSTS OF IT ARE NOT —“Intangible property exists inside the realms of both personal and group property. Intangible property exists in ideas or information which men are willing to defend, such as a man’s reputation, or the reputation of a man’s family or ancestors. These things may not be tangible in such that you can point at or identify them, but they exist as property because men are willing to defend them with violence, often times even more so than the more tangible types of property.”— Allen Freeman via Oliver Westcott

  • ( I mean, by and large my life’s work is devoted to ending the kind of sophism y

    ( I mean, by and large my life’s work is devoted to ending the kind of sophism you just stated, and criminalizing it as toxic pollution of the informational commons, and the institutions of cooperation that depend upon it. )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-19 00:15:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053077104483598336

    Reply addressees: @anEthanClark

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053070035709820929

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1053070035709820929

  • Definitions: Tolerance vs Forbearance (core)

    October 17th, 2018 4:30 PM DEFINITIONS: TOLERANCE VS FORBEARANCE by Luke Weinhagen The distinction between tolerance and forbearance.

    TOLERANCE: allowing costs to be assessed against non-consenting parties as ambiguity makes it unclear what additional party is specifically responsible for costs. – It is a passive state. – No agency. FORBEARANCE: intentionally taking responsibility for a cost to allow someone else not to. (example: my children, my disabled kin, my employee that has not matured fully yet). – It is an active state. – Allows agency.

  • DEFINITIONS: TOLERANCE VS FORBEARANCE by Luke Weinhagen The distinction between

    DEFINITIONS: TOLERANCE VS FORBEARANCE

    by Luke Weinhagen

    The distinction between tolerance and forbearance.

    TOLERANCE: allowing costs to be assessed against non-consenting parties as ambiguity makes it unclear what additional party is specifically responsible for costs.

    – It is a passive state.

    – No agency.

    FORBEARANCE: intentionally taking responsibility for a cost to allow someone else not to. (example: my children, my disabled kin, my employee that has not matured fully yet).

    – It is an active state.

    – Allows agency.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-17 16:30:00 UTC

  • Propertarianism Isn’t an Ideology.

    October 16th, 2018 4:22 PM PROPERTARIANISM ISN’T AN IDEOLOGY. IT’S THE LOGIC OF RECIPROCITY (Propertarianism) AND THE SCIENCE OF TESTIMONY, COMBINED INTO A FORMAL RATIO-EMPIRICAL SYSTEM OF LAW (Decidability) FOR ETHICS, AND POLITICS. In other words, it’s the solution to social science.

    —“This is crucial for people that want to claim they don’t adhere to the propertarian ideology. It is not an ideology. It is a methodology and much like science it focuses on empirical evidence and the falsification of proposed truth claims. Most people that say they don’t agree with propertarian ideology have an ideology of their own that has been found to be based on lies via propertarian methods – and that’s the real objection.”– Curtus Maximus (A Sock/Alias of Someone Else)

    [Y]ou cannot defeat it. Sorry. You can however, state that despite your ideology being parasitic, predatory(immoral) and dishonest (fraudulent) that you cannot compete by meritocratic (market, evolutionary, eugenic) means, (meaning you’re inferior) and therefore must resort to parasitism, predation, and deceit (fraud), to survive by parasitism, predation, and fraud. It’s ok to do that. It’s just the truth. But you can’t make any kind of moral argument to support it.

  • Propertarianism Isn’t an Ideology.

    October 16th, 2018 4:22 PM PROPERTARIANISM ISN’T AN IDEOLOGY. IT’S THE LOGIC OF RECIPROCITY (Propertarianism) AND THE SCIENCE OF TESTIMONY, COMBINED INTO A FORMAL RATIO-EMPIRICAL SYSTEM OF LAW (Decidability) FOR ETHICS, AND POLITICS. In other words, it’s the solution to social science.

    —“This is crucial for people that want to claim they don’t adhere to the propertarian ideology. It is not an ideology. It is a methodology and much like science it focuses on empirical evidence and the falsification of proposed truth claims. Most people that say they don’t agree with propertarian ideology have an ideology of their own that has been found to be based on lies via propertarian methods – and that’s the real objection.”– Curtus Maximus (A Sock/Alias of Someone Else)

    [Y]ou cannot defeat it. Sorry. You can however, state that despite your ideology being parasitic, predatory(immoral) and dishonest (fraudulent) that you cannot compete by meritocratic (market, evolutionary, eugenic) means, (meaning you’re inferior) and therefore must resort to parasitism, predation, and deceit (fraud), to survive by parasitism, predation, and fraud. It’s ok to do that. It’s just the truth. But you can’t make any kind of moral argument to support it.

  • PROPERTARIANISM ISN’T AN IDEOLOGY. IT’S THE LOGIC OF RECIPROCITY (Propertarianis

    PROPERTARIANISM ISN’T AN IDEOLOGY. IT’S THE LOGIC OF RECIPROCITY (Propertarianism) AND THE SCIENCE OF TESTIMONY, COMBINED INTO A FORMAL RATIO-EMPIRICAL SYSTEM OF LAW (Decidability) FOR ETHICS, AND POLITICS.

    In other words, it’s the solution to social science.

    —“This is crucial for people that want to claim they don’t adhere to the “propertarian ideology”. It is not an ideology. It is a methodology and much like science it focuses on empirical evidence and the falsification of proposed truth claims. Most people that say they don’t agree with “propertarian ideology” have an ideology of their own that has been found to be based on lies via propertarian methods and that’s the real objection.”– Curtus Maximus (A Sock/Alias of Someone Else)

    You cannot defeat it. Sorry. You can however, state that despite your ideology being parasitic, predatory(immoral) and dishonest (fraudulent) that you cannot compete by meritocratic (market, evolutionary, eugenic) means, (meaning you’re inferior) and therefore must resort to parasitism, predation, and deceit (fraud), to survive by parasitism, predation, and fraud.

    It’s ok to do that. It’s just the truth. But you can’t make any kind of moral argument to support it.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-16 16:22:00 UTC

  • ABSOLUTISM IS NONSENSE. ZERO TOLERANCE IS NOT. 1) We pursue what we can both und

    ABSOLUTISM IS NONSENSE. ZERO TOLERANCE IS NOT.

    1) We pursue what we can both undrestand and suits our interests.

    2) Absolutism is easy to understand. It’s the children’s-blocks version of political problem solving.

    3) Absolutism is easy to use when ‘backward’ or ‘at war’, but extremely error prone at competition and production. It is an extremely weak form of organization compared to markets. It depends on retaining the attention of the populace through constant manipulation. It is expensive. Hence absolute military, absolute law, market economy, limited charity is the optimum order. (India vs China. China has better demographics, is ethnically homogenous, and has the red army. India has none of the above.)

    4) one can organize the vast network of productions in an polity by authority (fear), compensation (reward), or deceit (fear or promise). But we are no longer in a position where the information system can be monopolized and the population is ignorant.

    5) The purpose of advancing markets (liberalism et all) is to provide those in power with the means of holding and expanding power cheaply and easily. In other words, one is naive to think he can capture attention and power without material incentives, and we are all victims of overestimating our deviation from the norm.

    6) The optimum government is flexible (Roman) with Authoritarianism for War, Markets for growth, and Redistribution for Windfalls.

    7) In other words: Money Scales Power. And the vast majority are always and everywhere motivated by (a) access to mates, (b) food and food prices (now energy as well), (c) change in economic condition (d) release from perceived oppression (taxation, competition, conquest).

    POWER REQUIRES WEALTH REQUIRES MARKET ORDER REQUIRES RULE OF LAW – which is what Putin has had to learn.

    OUR RULE OF LAW IS SIMPLY TOO TOLERANT.

    (Ergo – stop stroking your dicks, and masturbating to manga-fantasies of absolutism.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-10-15 19:44:00 UTC

  • Everything else is either amoral or moral

    October 15th, 2018 8:30 AM

    [W]e do not need to know what is moral, only immoral. Everything else is either amoral or moral. Since we know what is immoral, via negativa, we know what is moral.