Curt Doolittle

Category: Natural Law and Reciprocity

  • THE VALUE OF STATUS DEPRECATING SPEECH The only reason to prohibit status-deprec

    THE VALUE OF STATUS DEPRECATING SPEECH

    The only reason to prohibit status-depreciating speech is to increase revenues. But one’s right to revenues ends where falsehood begins. Why? Because the function of status deprecating speech is to prevent imposition of costs upon the commons: the assets in the markets for association, cooperation, reproduction, production, production of commons, of polities, and of war.

    (insults are important means of defense of the commons)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-07 07:48:00 UTC

  • Um. I know that if you are sensitive to the gender issue, it’s hard to see my un

    Um. I know that if you are sensitive to the gender issue, it’s hard to see my underlying strategy, but I’m saying we all MUST trade. Because if we don’t trade the option is women prey upon men, or men prey upon women. In that choice, men will always prey upon women.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 16:52:00 UTC

  • PRESENTING PROPERTARIANISM by Ivan Ilakovac You should present your work as a TE

    PRESENTING PROPERTARIANISM

    by Ivan Ilakovac

    You should present your work as a TECHNOLOGY for the construction of commons using Propertarianism, Testimonialism, and Algorithmic Natural Law.

    Present it as a neutral technology – like the violence on which it depends. Demonstrate how to rule with minority, majority and totality. Let the thousand flowers bloom.

    In that way, you will divide yourself from fringe – they don’t care about descriptive science, but for the decidability no matter the truth.

    Don’t give them any decisions, only descriptions of that which empirically works: aristocracy, republic and democracy — under the Natural Law.

    Law attracts aristocratic egalitarians due to the combination of force, creativity and wisdom it demands.

    Descriptions are for people like me who want to learn and change their own family, kin, and nation ruled by Natural Law, with different government for each nation.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 16:42:00 UTC

  • THINKING: Ok. So, attacking and falsifying my own possible desire for unnecessar

    THINKING:

    Ok. So, attacking and falsifying my own possible desire for unnecessary monopoly, one can create a natural law nomocracy with a minority, majority, or homogenous population.

    1) An Aristocratic Minority (a Caste) – Military, Judiciary, Sheriffs

    2) A Republican Majority(a Polity) – Add Banking and Industry

    3) A Democratic Monopoly (a People) – Add labor and svcs.

    Let’s say you take a caste of people, like the spartans, and specialize in rule. If that rule is by natural law, and produces commons for both rulers and ruled, I think that’s a great arrangement. You might call this fascism, but you might actually have a population ‘hire’ you to rule them for their own good.

    Let’s say you take a set of aristocratic families and their relations constituting either a sizable minority or a majority, and rule by natural law and produce commons that the nobility and the propertied classes choose to. You might all this oligarchy, but it certainly appears to be the most successful model on earth.

    Let’s say you take a whole population set up an hereditary monarchy, a regional nobility, professional administration(private not public) and a market for the commons where all classes have virtual houses that can produce commons through trade.

    I mean, you can implement Natural Law (Nomocracy) via Aristocracy, Republic, or Democracy, with minority, majority, totality (homogenous), by starting with a monarchy, adding a senate, adding houses for the classes with levels of enfranchisement depending upon whom you do and do not want to include.

    So is that all I need to produce? And, why do we need a homogenous polity? I mean, arguably demand-for-enfranchisement is actually a bad thing?

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-06 15:44:00 UTC

  • DISTRIBUTING DEFECTIVE SPEECH? If you sell a product that’s defective, or delive

    DISTRIBUTING DEFECTIVE SPEECH?

    If you sell a product that’s defective, or deliver a service that was defective, were you responsible for the consequences? Of course you were. Because you failed to perform due diligence.

    how do we know whether you failed to perform due diligence out of deception, out of laziness, or out of incompetence?

    This is the basic question. Does it matter if you cause damage intentionally or unintentionally? No. We still hold each other liable for the damage we do.

    What percent of people’s speech (bullshit) do they know is false or half true, or immoral or just wrong (bullshit) but they do it anyway to see if they can get away with it?

    Conversely, what percent of people’s speech have they done sufficient due diligence to insure that they do not spread a falsehood, half truth, immoral, or just ‘wrong’ information?

    What percent of people cannot be trusted to perform that due diligence – simply because they lack the ability?

    How would the world differ if we learned to speak truthfully along with our learning reading, writing, grammar, and arithmetic?

    It would be a very different place.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-05 18:31:00 UTC

  • TRANSCENDENCE (transcendence in fact: evolution) … AGENCY (physical, emotional

    TRANSCENDENCE (transcendence in fact: evolution)

    … AGENCY (physical, emotional, intellectual)

    … … SOVERIEGNTY (Via Negativa Limits)

    … … … Violence

    … … … … Law

    … … … … Allies

    … … … … Fighting (handed)

    … … … … War fighting (Armed)

    … … INVENTORY (Via Practica Limits )

    … … … Memory

    … … … … Metaphysics (Unknown assumptions)

    … … … … Information (Knowledge / Relations)

    … … … … Judgements (Values / Prejudices)

    … … … … Skills (Operations / Transformations)

    … … … … Habits (Behavior, manners)

    … … … … Will (discipline: mental and emotional)

    … … … Body

    … … … … Fitness (Physicality / Age / Desirability)

    … … … … Morphology

    … … … … Genetics

    … … … Assets

    … … … … Interests (‘paper capital’ / contracts etc.)

    … … … … Portable Capital

    … … … … Fixed Capital (inc. built / territorial)

    … … … … Organizational Capital (biz)

    … … … … Shareholder Commons (biz/etc)

    … … … Relations (Kin and Kith)

    … … … … Mate

    … … … … Offspring

    … … … … Kin

    … … … … … Clan, Tribe, Nation, Race, Mankind

    … … … … Kith

    … … … … … Friends, Neighbors, etc.

    … … … Productive Assets

    … … … … Reputation

    … … … … Customers (employment)

    … … … … Rents (yes, many of them)

    … … … … Associations

    … … … Political Assets

    … … … … Interest Holder Commons (public assets)

    … … … … Normative Commons (informal institutions)

    … … … … Civic Institutions (Banks, Insurers, Producers)

    … … … … Institutional Commons ( branches of govt )

    … … … … Citizenship Commons (insurance)

    … … … Generative Assets

    … … … … Rates of Transcendence (population ability distribution)

    … … … … Rates of Reproduction

    … … … … Rates of Production

    … … … … Rates of Adaptation

    … … … … Rates of Innovation

    … … … … Rates of Accumulation of capital

    … … … … Rates of Expansion

    … … … … Rates of Competition

    … … TRUTH (Via Positiva Limits)

    … … … Testimony

    … … … … Narratives (opportunities)

    … … … … Recipies (methods)

    … … … … Science (Measurements)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-05 17:43:00 UTC

  • Algorithmic Natural Law is a New Form of Measurement and Calculation. It’s Hard

    Algorithmic Natural Law is a New Form of Measurement and Calculation. It’s Hard.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-04 11:43:00 UTC

  • “Agape (brotherly love)=Mutual cooperation is the least costly survival strategy

    —“Agape (brotherly love)=Mutual cooperation is the least costly survival strategy (until it is not). Natural law.”—Shanaynay Tomson

    (Notice how he transformed a via positiva into a truth statement by the simple addition of limits.)

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-04 08:43:00 UTC

  • It doesn’t matter to me whether he existed or not. What matters is that exhausti

    It doesn’t matter to me whether he existed or not. What matters is that exhaustion of direct opportunity for cooperation is *scientifically* the optimum cooperative strategy, and that by limiting it to direct action within the society where one possesses sufficient knowledge to claim he does good without harm caused by externality, is a sufficient method of eliminating virtue spirals and free riding.

    It doesn’t matter to me whether achilles existed or not, it matters to me that the ordeal of the warrior (the necessity of tragedy) is ‘true’.

    It doesn’t matter to me that Alexander was an unpleasant fellow or that Aristotle was wrong in his physics.

    What matters is that (a) claims of wisdom and truth are not conflated, (b) claims of myth and history are not conflated (c) claims of good are in fact good and bad are in fact bad, (d) that every possible fictional statement be eliminated from every narrative including the pseudorational, pseudoscientific, and pseudomythical.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-03 14:07:00 UTC

  • THE EXTERNALITIES OF PHYSICAL AND NORMATIVE LIMITS Creating property has no nega

    THE EXTERNALITIES OF PHYSICAL AND NORMATIVE LIMITS

    Creating property has no negative externalities. Defending property against trespass has no negative externalities.

    It is more than clear that creating normative behavior and defending normative behavior has no negative externalities.

    It is more than clear that ‘disgust response’ and ‘purity response’ and ‘promise of maintaining a state of rational action’ evovled for good reason, and that ‘dusgusting, impure, and irrational’ behavior be limited to one’s bedroom with locked doors, closed windows, and insulation within earshot.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-08-03 12:05:00 UTC