[A]ristotle and Plato : Natural Law (vision but failure) Augustine and The Church. (incremental improvement – but failure) Hobbes, Locke, Smith and Hume (incremental improvement but bordering on science) Menger (Austrian/Galacian Science – German Rational tradition) 1840 Mises (Jewish/Galacian pseudoscience – jewish legal tradition) 1881 Hayek (German/Anglo Empirical – Adopted Anglo legal tradition) 1899 (failure again, with only hayek discovering that it is law not economics that produces social science) Rothbard (Jewish/Russian Justification -Jewish legal tradition)1926 Hoppe (German Rational – Continental legal tradition), 1949 Doolittle (Anglo Empirical – Anglo Saxon legal tradition). 1959 (success) Rothbard, Doolittle, and Hoppe. We solved social science in three generations. The only social science possible is the common law: the discovery of means of violating the requirement for productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, limited to positive externalities of the same. Economics is the study of information and incentives to cooperate. The basis of natural law is disproportionate value of cooperation. The language of natural law is economic, not moral. It was the failure of prior generations to rely upon financial and economic language rather than religious and moral language that prevented the solution to the problem of the social sciences. Morality is economic. It must be. Since we are part of the physical universe. This is where Hayek ended up. He was right. But even he could not escape his language. And even he did not know how to solve the problem of truth.
Form: Aphorism
-
We Solved Social Science
[A]ristotle and Plato : Natural Law (vision but failure) Augustine and The Church. (incremental improvement – but failure) Hobbes, Locke, Smith and Hume (incremental improvement but bordering on science) Menger (Austrian/Galacian Science – German Rational tradition) 1840 Mises (Jewish/Galacian pseudoscience – jewish legal tradition) 1881 Hayek (German/Anglo Empirical – Adopted Anglo legal tradition) 1899 (failure again, with only hayek discovering that it is law not economics that produces social science) Rothbard (Jewish/Russian Justification -Jewish legal tradition)1926 Hoppe (German Rational – Continental legal tradition), 1949 Doolittle (Anglo Empirical – Anglo Saxon legal tradition). 1959 (success) Rothbard, Doolittle, and Hoppe. We solved social science in three generations. The only social science possible is the common law: the discovery of means of violating the requirement for productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, limited to positive externalities of the same. Economics is the study of information and incentives to cooperate. The basis of natural law is disproportionate value of cooperation. The language of natural law is economic, not moral. It was the failure of prior generations to rely upon financial and economic language rather than religious and moral language that prevented the solution to the problem of the social sciences. Morality is economic. It must be. Since we are part of the physical universe. This is where Hayek ended up. He was right. But even he could not escape his language. And even he did not know how to solve the problem of truth.
-
Philosophers Must Ply A Trade
( [I]’m a technologist just like Da Vinci was a siege engine designer, Plato administrator of a school, Bacon a Lawyer, Descartes a Soldier, Montaigne a bureaucrat, and Spinoza a lens grinder. A man must have a trade if he is not to become a parasite. Most men practice both vocations and avocations. For some they are the same. For others they are different. For Philosophers, unlike scientists, it remains an open question whether we do more harm or good. If we ply a trade we at least tip the balance in favor of good. )
-
Philosophers Must Ply A Trade
( [I]’m a technologist just like Da Vinci was a siege engine designer, Plato administrator of a school, Bacon a Lawyer, Descartes a Soldier, Montaigne a bureaucrat, and Spinoza a lens grinder. A man must have a trade if he is not to become a parasite. Most men practice both vocations and avocations. For some they are the same. For others they are different. For Philosophers, unlike scientists, it remains an open question whether we do more harm or good. If we ply a trade we at least tip the balance in favor of good. )
-
Democracy is a Luxury Good that’s the Product of Rule of Law.
[T]he luxury of democratic redistribution is the product of the prosperity that results from the long term application of rule of law, common law, natural law, and eugenic reproduction. Man is naturally parasitic and societies without rule of law, common law, natural law, and eugenic reproduction operate at the maximum corruption possible both at the political and personal level.
-
Democracy is a Luxury Good that’s the Product of Rule of Law.
[T]he luxury of democratic redistribution is the product of the prosperity that results from the long term application of rule of law, common law, natural law, and eugenic reproduction. Man is naturally parasitic and societies without rule of law, common law, natural law, and eugenic reproduction operate at the maximum corruption possible both at the political and personal level.
-
The Rifle Did It. Just As The Spear.
[T]he moment the professional warrior could be countered by the rifleman the domestication of the aristocracy was doomed, because it was the soldier protecting his leaders instead of the leaders protecting their workers. This mirrors the evolution of the spear which allowed the alpha to be controlled, reproduction to be distributed, and women to use gossip to incite the betas to contain or kill the alphas. The development of expensive metal armor, the wheel-chariot, and the horse, restored the alpha. The rifle restored the balance. If we are to rule, then how are we to gain asymmetry and restore eugenic reproduction, and the meritocratic society?
-
The Rifle Did It. Just As The Spear.
[T]he moment the professional warrior could be countered by the rifleman the domestication of the aristocracy was doomed, because it was the soldier protecting his leaders instead of the leaders protecting their workers. This mirrors the evolution of the spear which allowed the alpha to be controlled, reproduction to be distributed, and women to use gossip to incite the betas to contain or kill the alphas. The development of expensive metal armor, the wheel-chariot, and the horse, restored the alpha. The rifle restored the balance. If we are to rule, then how are we to gain asymmetry and restore eugenic reproduction, and the meritocratic society?
-
It Doesn’t Matter Who Rules – Only That We Deny People Rule.
[W]e always get it backwards. It doesn’t matter who rules. Only that we deny people the ability to rule. We deny them through rule of law. A king is but a judge of last resort. A government but an insurer of last resort. A parliament but a market for the production of commons: a market of last resort. All else from family to production is market activity alone.
-
It Doesn’t Matter Who Rules – Only That We Deny People Rule.
[W]e always get it backwards. It doesn’t matter who rules. Only that we deny people the ability to rule. We deny them through rule of law. A king is but a judge of last resort. A government but an insurer of last resort. A parliament but a market for the production of commons: a market of last resort. All else from family to production is market activity alone.