Curt Doolittle

Form: Argument

  • There Is Only One Scientific Method for The Constitution of Gods – and I Think We Know It

    —“Empirical mechanism for such phenomena not yet found, “—

    [W]ell as the top physicists have already stated, we know the complete spectrum of forces because there is no ‘room’ for any other force. So no, no information can exist in the spectrum. I can’t remember who works on this (but I know how to find out), and it’s sort of taboo for the reasons that are obvious – it threatens faith the occult that faith depends upon. But, just as we know the complete composition of chemistry, we know the complete composition of interacting forces. What we don’t know is the geometry of the primary force that creates the grammar we know of as quantum mechanics, that would explain gravity at the quantum level and unite quantum(small) and relativistic (large) – both of which are currently descriptive rather than causal. God is just what I said it was above: an archetypal character with whom we intuititionistically (auto-associatively) role play (predict), as we would a parent or headman, and through that filter – a filter to whom we are as transparent as we were to parents and headmen – we can judge our intuitions. Man is the measure of all things to man, because man is the only system of measurement available to man. God is a system of measurement in the group’s ideal of man to imitate (jesus, Achilles) a demigod to aspire to (odin, Hercules,), a god to negotiate with (zeus, thor, tyr), one to obey (jehova, allah), or one to simply understand (deism, the physical and natural laws). Any creature inventing a god would invent one in his image just as we have – and just as the hundreds of gods have been invented abandoned or lost before the present gods. Science killed the lie of god and discovered the truth of god, and the laws of the universe, and only europeans have done so.

  • There Is Only One Scientific Method for The Constitution of Gods – and I Think We Know It

    —“Empirical mechanism for such phenomena not yet found, “—

    [W]ell as the top physicists have already stated, we know the complete spectrum of forces because there is no ‘room’ for any other force. So no, no information can exist in the spectrum. I can’t remember who works on this (but I know how to find out), and it’s sort of taboo for the reasons that are obvious – it threatens faith the occult that faith depends upon. But, just as we know the complete composition of chemistry, we know the complete composition of interacting forces. What we don’t know is the geometry of the primary force that creates the grammar we know of as quantum mechanics, that would explain gravity at the quantum level and unite quantum(small) and relativistic (large) – both of which are currently descriptive rather than causal. God is just what I said it was above: an archetypal character with whom we intuititionistically (auto-associatively) role play (predict), as we would a parent or headman, and through that filter – a filter to whom we are as transparent as we were to parents and headmen – we can judge our intuitions. Man is the measure of all things to man, because man is the only system of measurement available to man. God is a system of measurement in the group’s ideal of man to imitate (jesus, Achilles) a demigod to aspire to (odin, Hercules,), a god to negotiate with (zeus, thor, tyr), one to obey (jehova, allah), or one to simply understand (deism, the physical and natural laws). Any creature inventing a god would invent one in his image just as we have – and just as the hundreds of gods have been invented abandoned or lost before the present gods. Science killed the lie of god and discovered the truth of god, and the laws of the universe, and only europeans have done so.

  • re: “I Never Err”

    RE: “I NEVER ERR” I don’t think you understand what I mean by that statement. I mean that if I write a constructivist proof in P-logic that I don’t err. The reason is that it’s so damned difficult – impossible really – to err if you write one. But sure, I make mistakes all the time, like everyone else. A mistake has no bearing on the outcome. An error has a bearing on the outcome. It is very very difficult to make an error in P-logic. The phrasing “I never err” is to bait the other party into making an argument, thereby minimizing the frame I need to work within, rather than forcing me to explain with a wall of text in order to discover the opponent’s frame. All of this explanation written down on the “Criticisms” page links on the site. The purpose of P-logic is falsificationary: we create definitions that consists of series, and supply demand curves, and use them to create fields of arguments that falsify more than justify. So P-logic seeks to expose so many falsehoods that only truthful statements can survive. As such where traditional philosophy seeks to find agreement between parties, P-logic falsifies all possibilities other than what we must agree to. In other words, the purpose of P-logic is to eliminate falsehood. It suppresses falsehood, bias, and deceit. And this is so novel that without some experience with math, computer science, or economics, it’s somewhere between counter-intuitive and inconceivable for most people. And that’s because P-logic is prosecutorial. You do’t end up disagreeing. You end up exposing the other party as a thief. This is why P-logic is so powerful. If the technique offends you, then It’s possible you haven’t run a large organization, participated in politics, or competed in the courts against people who are dishonest. I have. I don’t presume the other party has a moral character, has good intentions, is intellectually honest, or even has any more degree of agency than a puppy. I assume everyone is a gene machine and that agency and self awareness are rare occurrences. And I assume I am a gene machine too – it’s just that my gene machine brought me here, to this function, at this point in time. And the court-jester that is my internal personality is just along for the ride.

  • re: “I Never Err”

    RE: “I NEVER ERR” I don’t think you understand what I mean by that statement. I mean that if I write a constructivist proof in P-logic that I don’t err. The reason is that it’s so damned difficult – impossible really – to err if you write one. But sure, I make mistakes all the time, like everyone else. A mistake has no bearing on the outcome. An error has a bearing on the outcome. It is very very difficult to make an error in P-logic. The phrasing “I never err” is to bait the other party into making an argument, thereby minimizing the frame I need to work within, rather than forcing me to explain with a wall of text in order to discover the opponent’s frame. All of this explanation written down on the “Criticisms” page links on the site. The purpose of P-logic is falsificationary: we create definitions that consists of series, and supply demand curves, and use them to create fields of arguments that falsify more than justify. So P-logic seeks to expose so many falsehoods that only truthful statements can survive. As such where traditional philosophy seeks to find agreement between parties, P-logic falsifies all possibilities other than what we must agree to. In other words, the purpose of P-logic is to eliminate falsehood. It suppresses falsehood, bias, and deceit. And this is so novel that without some experience with math, computer science, or economics, it’s somewhere between counter-intuitive and inconceivable for most people. And that’s because P-logic is prosecutorial. You do’t end up disagreeing. You end up exposing the other party as a thief. This is why P-logic is so powerful. If the technique offends you, then It’s possible you haven’t run a large organization, participated in politics, or competed in the courts against people who are dishonest. I have. I don’t presume the other party has a moral character, has good intentions, is intellectually honest, or even has any more degree of agency than a puppy. I assume everyone is a gene machine and that agency and self awareness are rare occurrences. And I assume I am a gene machine too – it’s just that my gene machine brought me here, to this function, at this point in time. And the court-jester that is my internal personality is just along for the ride.

  • The only cancer on this earth is abrahamism: the systemic application of the fem

    The only cancer on this earth is abrahamism: the systemic application of the female method of undermining as a means of civilizational warfare under pretense of religion sold to useful idiots using the false promise of freedom from natural laws of our differences.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 20:43:25 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231318598758604800

    Reply addressees: @stack_dalton @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231317974822346752

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @stack_dalton @razibkhan Today we are fighting Islamic decivilization, Jewish undermining of our civilization by conflict generation, using false promise of marxism, socialism, cultural marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and human science denial, and immigration in a second attempt at a semitic dark age.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1231317974822346752

  • Today we are fighting Islamic decivilization, Jewish undermining of our civiliza

    Today we are fighting Islamic decivilization, Jewish undermining of our civilization by conflict generation, using false promise of marxism, socialism, cultural marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and human science denial, and immigration in a second attempt at a semitic dark age.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 20:40:56 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231317974822346752

    Reply addressees: @stack_dalton @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231317040952233990

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @stack_dalton @razibkhan Europeans dragged mankind out of superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, early death. The abrahamics created the dark age, 1B dead, and the destruction arts, letters, crafts, culture, institutions, genetics of five great civilizations.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1231317040952233990

  • Europeans dragged mankind out of superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, s

    Europeans dragged mankind out of superstition, ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, early death. The abrahamics created the dark age, 1B dead, and the destruction arts, letters, crafts, culture, institutions, genetics of five great civilizations.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 20:37:13 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231317040952233990

    Reply addressees: @stack_dalton @razibkhan

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231316449224019969

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @stack_dalton @razibkhan The Abrahamic method of undermining by false promise baiting into hazard: Judaism to undermine, christianity to weaken, islam to consume and destroy.

    I don’t make errors.
    It’s my job.
    It’s a dirty job.
    But someone has to do it 😉

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1231316449224019969

  • The Jewish century is over. The second fall of european civilization by the dest

    The Jewish century is over. The second fall of european civilization by the destruction of german and russian civilization will not be followed by anglo civilization.

    We will restore rule of law.
    And it will “happen again”
    Just as it always does.
    Because it is earned.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-22 17:29:20 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231269755505516546

    Reply addressees: @mjs_DC @Slate

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1231269450898341888

    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    @mjs_DC @Slate The Parade of undermining western civ. with pseudoscience, sophism, and lies: Cantor, Boas, Marx, Freud, Adorno-Fromm, Derrida, Friedan, and hundreds of followers and thousands of propagandists: unwarrantable, false promise, baiting into hazard, with Pilpul, Critique and “GSRRM”.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1231269450898341888

  • THERE IS ONLY ONE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF GODS – AND I THINK W

    THERE IS ONLY ONE SCIENTIFIC METHOD FOR THE CONSTITUTION OF GODS – AND I THINK WE KNOW IT

    —“Empirical mechanism for such phenomena not yet found, “—

    Well as the top physicists have already stated, we know the complete spectrum of forces because there is no ‘room’ for any other force. So no, no information can exist in the spectrum. I can’t remember who works on this (but I know how to find out), and it’s sort of taboo for the reasons that are obvious – it threatens faith the occult that faith depends upon.

    But, just as we know the complete composition of chemistry, we know the complete composition of interacting forces. What we don’t know is the geometry of the primary force that creates the grammar we know of as quantum mechanics, that would explain gravity at the quantum level and unite quantum(small) and relativistic (large) – both of which are currently descriptive rather than causal.

    God is just what I said it was above: an archetypal character with whom we intuititionistically(auto-associatively) role play (predict), as we would a parent or headman, and through that filter – a filter to whom we are as transparent as we were to parents and headmen – we can judge our intuitions.

    Man is the measure of all things to man, because man is the only system of measurement available to man. God is a system of measurement in the group’s ideal of man to imitate (jesus, Achilles) a demigod to aspire to (odin, Hercules,), a god to negotiate with (zeus, thor, tyr), one to obey (jehova, allah), or one to simply understand (deism, the physical and natural laws). Any creature inventing a god would invent one in his image just as we have – and just as the hundreds of gods have been invented abandoned or lost before the present gods.

    Science killed the lie of god and discovered the truth of god, and the laws of the universe, and only europeans have done so.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-21 13:25:00 UTC

  • If Natural Law, Physical Law and Gods Law are the same then yes, morals come fro

    If Natural Law, Physical Law and Gods Law are the same then yes, morals come from God. If morals are not the same as natural and physical law then men have erred in interpreting gods or nature’s law.

    I prefer christians, especially devoted christians over all other people – and the evidentiary reality is christianity ‘works’ to produce better people than all other religions and better than every secular alternative. I just prefer to maintain the separation between law(Truth) and faith(Wisdom) and so theology must defend wisdom claims (the good) not truth claims (the true or false).

    –“​I thought doolittle was anti religion”– Nathan Danner

    —“​I’m not sure his religious views. These two are bringing religion into propertarianism whether Kurt intended it to be there or not.”—Nate

    I have a job and I do my job. My job is to protect my people from the left’s lies, and another dark age – and part of that job is to discover a way to restore a religion to ‘the religion of the state’.

    I know it is hard for the faithful to tolerate my work on religion. It’s certainly hard on me. And I request only that while I work on law others work on faith, and hopefully I will someday discover a means of uniting them.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-20 20:21:00 UTC