Form: Argument

  • The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. An

    The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. And the longer I work on this problem the more determined I am. We have the prosperity and opportunity to pursue our moral instincts, have no reason to compromise with one another, and I certainly have no desire to rule people I consider disgusting, revolting and immoral. So the only solution is the devolution of the federal government to its original mission, and the release of the states to produce commons and culture suited to the preferences of the people. This will result in blue city states, and otherwise self-sorting new states – probably by county. And at that point we will learn that we are sorting by ancestry and subculture more so than anything else. Which is natural to all of mankind.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 01:44:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635456944159768578

  • The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. An

    The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. And the longer I work on this problem the more determined I am. We have the prosperity and opportunity to pursue our moral instincts, have no reason to compromise with one another, and I certainly have no desire to rule people I consider disgusting, revolting and immoral. So the only solution is the devolution of the federal government to its original mission, and the release of the states to produce commons and culture suited to the preferences of the people. This will result in blue city states, and otherwise self-sorting new states – probably by county. And at that point we will learn that we are sorting by ancestry and subculture more so than anything else. Which is natural to all of mankind.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 01:44:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635456944252108800

  • The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. An

    The only way for the right and left to be happy, and not war, is to separate. And the longer I work on this problem the more determined I am. We have the prosperity and opportunity to pursue our moral instincts, have no reason to compromise with one another, and I certainly have no desire to rule people I consider disgusting, revolting and immoral, so the only solution is devolution of the federal government and the release of the states to produce commons and culture suited to the preferences of the people. This will result in blue city states, and otherwise self-sorting new states – probably by county. And at that point we will learn that we are sorting by ancestry and subculture more so than anything else.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-14 01:44:55 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635456347977154560

  • WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS We don’t have to agree on everything

    WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS
    We don’t have to agree on everything. Hanson and has built a career from stating western civ begins with the Greeks. So have most historians. Gimbutas, Anthony, Mallory, Duchesne, and I, all make the argument it’s the steppe. Is that a material difference? Not really. Because we agree on the resulting properties of the west. Aristotle and Epicurus understood gravity existed, and Newton and Einstein increased the precision but still didn’t solve it. Smith, Hayek and I all recognized informal capital, and incrementally advanced it’s understanding. Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Hoppe and I solved social science in four generations. We don’t need to think the same. We just need to head in roughly the same direction. Knowledge accumulates. Democracy is for herds. Markets are for men.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:57:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635309060626030592

  • WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS We don’t have to agree on everything

    WE DON’T HAVE TO AGREE ON MEANS – ONLY ENDS
    We don’t have to agree on everything. Hanson and has built a career from stating western civ begins with the Greeks. So have most historians. Gimbutas, Anthony, Mallory, Duchesne, and I, all make the argument it’s the steppe. Is that a material difference? Not really. Because we agree on the resulting properties of the west. Aristotle and Epicurus understood gravity existed, and Newton and Einstein increased the precision but still didn’t solve it. Smith, Hayek and I all recognized informal capital, and incrementally advanced it’s understanding. Mises, Rothbard, Hayek, Hoppe and I solved social science in four generations. We don’t need to think the same. We just need to head in roughly the same direction. Knowledge accumulates. Democracy is for herds. Markets are for men.


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:57:17 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635309060755996674

  • Brevity is the soul of wit (analogy, suggestion, deceit), while operational pros

    Brevity is the soul of wit (analogy, suggestion, deceit), while operational prose is the grammar of testimony (truth).

    I can write logic, algorithms, operational proofs (what you’re objecting to), arguments, essays, opinion, history, fiction, scripts, and poetry with near equal facility.

    But my job – requires the paradigm, logic, vocabulary, and syntax of testimonial truth: operational prose, including serialization as a mesurement in defense against ambiguity.

    It looks like ordinary language. But it’s closer to mathematics and programming, but using ordinal rather than cardinal logic.

    Cheers

    Reply addressees: @goufmanouf @ConceptualJames


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:14:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635298293818224640

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635284366476861444


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Well, you don’t know this, but you should be for engaging with me, that I work in cognitive science, behavioral economics, epistemology, testimony, law, and most especially the logic of lying. So just as when you go to a doctor or lawyer and speak, and in turn they disambiguate what you’ve said into causes, I do the same. It’s just that I see how you’re lying, defrauding, cheating, stealing, undermining, projecting, defending, evading, and denying. And work in this discipline unfortunately means a vast majority of the population is about as smart, cunning, witty, funny as a preschooler.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1635284366476861444

  • Brevity is the soul of wit (analogy, suggestion, deceit), while operational pros

    Brevity is the soul of wit (analogy, suggestion, deceit), while operational prose is the grammar of testimony (truth).

    I can write logic, algorithms, operational proofs (what you’re objecting to), arguments, essays, opinion, history, fiction, scripts, and poetry with near equal facility.

    But my job – requires the paradigm, logic, vocabulary, and syntax of testimonial truth: operational prose, including serialization as a mesurement in defense against ambiguity.

    It looks like ordinary language. But it’s closer to mathematics and programming, but using ordinal rather than cardinal logic.

    Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-13 15:14:30 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635298293931556864

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635284366476861444


    IN REPLY TO:

    Unknown author

    Well, you don’t know this, but you should be for engaging with me, that I work in cognitive science, behavioral economics, epistemology, testimony, law, and most especially the logic of lying. So just as when you go to a doctor or lawyer and speak, and in turn they disambiguate what you’ve said into causes, I do the same. It’s just that I see how you’re lying, defrauding, cheating, stealing, undermining, projecting, defending, evading, and denying. And work in this discipline unfortunately means a vast majority of the population is about as smart, cunning, witty, funny as a preschooler.

    Original post: https://x.com/i/web/status/1635284366476861444

  • @quantifyqualify FYI: WHY IS WHITENESS SO HARD: BECAUSE IT’S COSTLY. If you make

    @quantifyqualify
    FYI:
    WHY IS WHITENESS SO HARD: BECAUSE IT’S COSTLY.

    If you make a list of every country, and you list every bit of even vaguely useful data about the people in each country in a huge spreadsheet you would learn that there is one number that explains all the rest.

    (a) There were four speciation events as man evolved and spread around the world.
    (b) Each event increased local neoteny (domestication)
    (c) Increases in neoteny exchange aggression and sexual maturity for agency and neural plasticity.
    (e) As a result, the different continental speciation events resulted in different class distributions.
    (d) The result is differences in average of approximately 75, 85, 100, 105 and everything in between, with 100 being European (central).
    (e) In the agrarian age, every civilization developed institutions to assist with social order at scale.
    (f) There are only three means of coercion. So there are only three axes of institutions Social (religion, feminine, non-aggression), reciprocal (trade, contract, law, neutral) and Forceful (state, military, masculine)
    (g) The order of these institutions determines the strongest, next strongest, and weak or failed institution.
    (h) each of these institutions adapts at different speeds.
    (i) Each civilization develops a group strategy, metaphysics, myth, history, a system of logic and argument, and institutions of intergenerational persistence.
    (j) These strategies, institutions, and demographics are self-reinforcing over the millennia. And they are very resistant to change.
    (k) And they demand vastly different responsibilities from each member of each society, and each class or caste.
    So whether genetic, class, or cultural, or some combination thereof, the trust necessary for western high trust civilization seems impossible for others to develop unless they fully integrate and can achieve middle-class status.
    Add that our postwar privilege of being the only civilization left standing, raised laboring and working classes into the lower class, then the 70s ended that privilege, and the 90s exhausted it, and 2010s backtracked it, then you have people in the states (and Europe) who are ‘not happy’ with the responsibility they must bear, given the returns they will no longer obtain.
    Worse, the Marxist-pomo-woke cult that James is disrobing in gory detail consists of little more than promising that this genetic, class, cultural, and economic reality is oppression rather than their unfitness for competition in the new world normal. And worse, they vaguely sense (correctly) that over the next decade or two it’s going to get far, far worse, and the world far, far poorer. Because the USA cannot afford to maintain the global trade system if we must compete with other civilizations that want to end it.

    That’s enough for now
    And no this wasn’t any effort to write. 😉
    And Grammarly largely kept up even if it slowed the keyboard response time. 😉
    -Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 23:50:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635065780470534146

  • @quantifyqualify FYI: WHY IS WHITENESS SO HARD: BECAUSE IT’S COSTLY. If you make

    @quantifyqualify
    FYI:
    WHY IS WHITENESS SO HARD: BECAUSE IT’S COSTLY.

    If you make a list of every country, and you list every bit of even vaguely useful data about the people in each country in a huge spreadsheet you would learn that there is one number that explains all the rest.

    (a) There were four speciation events as man evolved and spread around the world.
    (b) Each event increased local neoteny (domestication)
    (c) Increases in neoteny exchange aggression and sexual maturity for agency and neural plasticity.
    (e) As a result, the different continental speciation events resulted in different class distributions.
    (d) The result is differences in average of approximately 75, 85, 100, 105 and everything in between, with 100 being European (central).
    (e) In the agrarian age, every civilization developed institutions to assist with social order at scale.
    (f) There are only three means of coercion. So there are only three axes of institutions Social (religion, feminine, non-aggression), reciprocal (trade, contract, law, neutral) and Forceful (state, military, masculine)
    (g) The order of these institutions determines the strongest, next strongest, and weak or failed institution.
    (h) each of these institutions adapts at different speeds.
    (i) Each civilization develops a group strategy, metaphysics, myth, history, a system of logic and argument, and institutions of intergenerational persistence.
    (j) These strategies, institutions, and demographics are self-reinforcing over the millennia. And they are very resistant to change.
    (k) And they demand vastly different responsibilities from each member of each society, and each class or caste.
    So whether genetic, class, or cultural, or some combination thereof, the trust necessary for western high trust civilization seems impossible for others to develop unless they fully integrate and can achieve middle-class status.
    Add that our postwar privilege of being the only civilization left standing, raised laboring and working classes into the lower class, then the 70s ended that privilege, and the 90s exhausted it, and 2010s backtracked it, then you have people in the states (and Europe) who are ‘not happy’ with the responsibility they must bear, given the returns they will no longer obtain.
    Worse, the Marxist-pomo-woke cult that James is disrobing in gory detail consists of little more than promising that this genetic, class, cultural, and economic reality is oppression rather than their unfitness for competition in the new world normal. And worse, they vaguely sense (correctly) that over the next decade or two it’s going to get far, far worse, and the world far, far poorer. Because the USA cannot afford to maintain the global trade system if we must compete with other civilizations that want to end it.

    That’s enough for now
    And no this wasn’t any effort to write. 😉
    And Grammarly largely kept up even if it slowed the keyboard response time. 😉
    -Cheers


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 23:50:34 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635065780785102848

  • “Q: CURT WHY THE EMPHASIS ON TRIFUNCTIONALISM?” (bookmark)(core) Well, nature ha

    “Q: CURT WHY THE EMPHASIS ON TRIFUNCTIONALISM?”
    (bookmark)(core)

    Well, nature has a hard problem beginning in the quantum background, and it solves it with velocity(spin) resulting in positive, negative, and equilibriuim. There is nothing in the unverse that violates this model – there can’t be. Everything in the universe is constructed from it.
    So we see this same rule throughout material, all life, and all of mankind, and most imporantly it the three possible means of human coercion: Physical, Social, and Reciprocal.
    Then we see it as large scale in organizing principles of state, religion, and contract(law). And we see it incomparative civilization as means of competition between races expressed in the various possible path dependences between state, religion, contract(law) institutions. And finally we see it in logic as undecidable, possibly true, and definitely false, and in all language that follows the same rules.

    There are only twenty something rules like this.
    And all of existence is explained by them.
    That is why, we make such an emphasis on trifuctionalism, as well as continuous recursive disambiguation, which is the means by which the universe defeats entropy (pressure spatial expansion) with negative entropy (concentration in mass), and the P-Method of disambiguation by enumeration, serialization, disambiguation, operationalization, of all terms into a system of ordinal measurement, within those rules.

    It might seem a lot at the beginning, but it’s the universe’s programming language. Not math. Why? Mathematical reducibility is smaller than computational reducibility. 😉

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2023-03-12 21:34:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1635031469063020545