Curt Doolittle

Form: Critique

  • THE FRAUD OF “AN OPEN MIND” —“There is no point in arguing with someone with a

    THE FRAUD OF “AN OPEN MIND”

    —“There is no point in arguing with someone with a closed mind”— Anon

    The problem is knowing when you are asking for an open mind : meaning “time to consider the argument”, and asking someone to agree, believe, or express faith in that which is not an argument but a fraud.

    The only non-fraudulent version of that statement is:

    –“there is no point in arguing with someone who is intellectually dishonest”–

    Appeals for an ‘open mind’ are always frauds. ALWAYS. Either you have an argument or you don’t. Either the you AND the other person(s) are intellectually honest or you are not.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 09:48:00 UTC

  • Lefism is just another religion using exactly the same strategy as judaism, chrs

    Lefism is just another religion using exactly the same strategy as judaism, chrstianity and islam: except this time its with pseudoscience and pseudohistory and pseudorationalism instead of supernaturalism. Sophism 2.0

    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-02 13:44:14 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1013780390316781568

    Reply addressees: @MetrolinxWatch

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1013779666136530944

    IN REPLY TO:

    @MetrolinxWatch

    @curtdoolittle I’m interested to see how conservative perspectives on Christianity are evolving in many cases. While leftists paint conservatism as closed-minded and intolerant, they are the ones who now repeat the same dogmas to infinity just as effectively as any Christian zealot has.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1013779666136530944

  • Analytic Philosophy

    Analytic Philosophy One of the nonsense descriptions of analytic philosophy is that one is required to write in ‘clear’ prose. This is yet another bit of rationalist nonsense. —“it is characterized by an emphasis on argumentative clarity and precision, often making use of formal logic, conceptual analysis, and, to a lesser degree, mathematics and the natural sciences.”— The analytic philosophy movement (anglo) evolved out of the anglo predisposition for legal prose, the conversion of mathematics from prose to symbols, and the (desperate) desire of philosophy to find a pretense of calling itself a science. As far as I know the movement is dead, as have been most philosophical movements. At present, I am not sure much philosophy exists outside of a study of the evolution of math, logic, science, law, politics, and theology. So, it’s not that analytic prose must be clearer per se, in the sense that the average idiot should be able to understand it in colloquial prose (we leave that to the left and the europeans) – it’s that it must be constructed out of terms, phrases, and sentences that are logically testable, and free of analogy, the imaginary, and the phenomenal(experiential) – and the undecidable left to scientific investigation. Or as I would say it: it must be stated as mathematical, logical, operational, or scientific argument under natural law. The problem is that: 1) While relations are constant in mathematics they are also trivially simple (positional). 2) There are always more dimensions in a comparison of references than there are constant relations (this is a truism). 3) Closure does not exist (overplay contradiction) …. Argh. I don’t want to go through all this again…. Rationalism is usable only for interpretation of scriptural law. It evolved out of it. (Pilpul and Critique). Justified true belief is nonsense. No amount of justification will determine what is true. It is only survival from criticism that determinse a truth candidate, and justification merely explains one of the roads to rome (understanding).

  • Analytic Philosophy

    Analytic Philosophy One of the nonsense descriptions of analytic philosophy is that one is required to write in ‘clear’ prose. This is yet another bit of rationalist nonsense. —“it is characterized by an emphasis on argumentative clarity and precision, often making use of formal logic, conceptual analysis, and, to a lesser degree, mathematics and the natural sciences.”— The analytic philosophy movement (anglo) evolved out of the anglo predisposition for legal prose, the conversion of mathematics from prose to symbols, and the (desperate) desire of philosophy to find a pretense of calling itself a science. As far as I know the movement is dead, as have been most philosophical movements. At present, I am not sure much philosophy exists outside of a study of the evolution of math, logic, science, law, politics, and theology. So, it’s not that analytic prose must be clearer per se, in the sense that the average idiot should be able to understand it in colloquial prose (we leave that to the left and the europeans) – it’s that it must be constructed out of terms, phrases, and sentences that are logically testable, and free of analogy, the imaginary, and the phenomenal(experiential) – and the undecidable left to scientific investigation. Or as I would say it: it must be stated as mathematical, logical, operational, or scientific argument under natural law. The problem is that: 1) While relations are constant in mathematics they are also trivially simple (positional). 2) There are always more dimensions in a comparison of references than there are constant relations (this is a truism). 3) Closure does not exist (overplay contradiction) …. Argh. I don’t want to go through all this again…. Rationalism is usable only for interpretation of scriptural law. It evolved out of it. (Pilpul and Critique). Justified true belief is nonsense. No amount of justification will determine what is true. It is only survival from criticism that determinse a truth candidate, and justification merely explains one of the roads to rome (understanding).

  • Reason Magazine as The Immature Male

    Reason Magazine is an archetypal example of the selective measurement of ascendant male interests. 

    <--Female--------Ascendent Male-------Established Male-->
....Consumption...Production...........Preservation...
....Short Term....Medium Term..........Long Term.....
....Socialism.....Libertarian..........Aristocracy....
....Gossip........Exchange.............Force.........

    (a) What deltas in Capital do Reason Magazine’s editors and authors not account for? (Classical – Jewish Blending) (b) How does Mises Differ from Cato and Reason? (Jewish) (c) How does Reason differ from Cato Institute? (Classical) (d) How does Heritage differ from Cato? (Burkeian) (e) Where does each sit on this scale? Notice that there are no German think tanks in the USA on the right, only on the left. In the end the rider (passenger) is incognizant of the elephant. We are gene machines. And our differences are due largely to genetics. And those genetics are the result of degree of Neoteny and distribution of gender dimorphism, and the degree of uncorrected (not yet selected out) error (defect) in those genes.

  • Reason Magazine as The Immature Male

    Reason Magazine is an archetypal example of the selective measurement of ascendant male interests. 

    <--Female--------Ascendent Male-------Established Male-->
....Consumption...Production...........Preservation...
....Short Term....Medium Term..........Long Term.....
....Socialism.....Libertarian..........Aristocracy....
....Gossip........Exchange.............Force.........

    (a) What deltas in Capital do Reason Magazine’s editors and authors not account for? (Classical – Jewish Blending) (b) How does Mises Differ from Cato and Reason? (Jewish) (c) How does Reason differ from Cato Institute? (Classical) (d) How does Heritage differ from Cato? (Burkeian) (e) Where does each sit on this scale? Notice that there are no German think tanks in the USA on the right, only on the left. In the end the rider (passenger) is incognizant of the elephant. We are gene machines. And our differences are due largely to genetics. And those genetics are the result of degree of Neoteny and distribution of gender dimorphism, and the degree of uncorrected (not yet selected out) error (defect) in those genes.

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. REASON MAGAZINE AS THE IMMATURE MALE Reason M

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    REASON MAGAZINE AS THE IMMATURE MALE

    Reason Magazine is an archetypal example of the selective measurement of ascendant male interests.

    <-Female———-Ascendent Male——-Established Male->
    ….Consumption………..Production………………Preservation…
    ….Short Term…………Medium Term……………..Long Term…..
    ….Socialism……………..Libertarian………………..Aristocracy….
    ….Gossip…………………..Exchange……………………Force………

    (a) What deltas in Capital do Reason Magazine’s editors and authors not account for? (Classical – Jewish Blending)

    (b) How does Mises Differ from Cato and Reason? (Jewish)

    (c) How does Reason differ from Cato Institute? (Classical)

    (d) How does Heritage differ from Cato? (Burkeian)

    (e) Where does each sit on this scale?

    Notice that there are no German think tanks in the USA on the right, only on the left.

    In the end the rider (passenger) is incognizant of the elephant. We are gene machines. And our differences are due largely to genetics. And those genetics are the result of degree of Neoteny and distribution of gender dimorphism, and the degree of uncorrected (not yet selected out) error (defect) in those genes.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-28 13:33:12 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. (nonsense) (Ah… now I see the problem with

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    (nonsense)
    (Ah… now I see the problem with the Season: 1) You didn’t solve the problem of giving Jeffrey the necessary dialog, and didn’t use extra time to help understand his confusion 2) The Episode five Japanese episode was a waste of an episode (don’t make excuses, yes it was), and so was the first half of episode six. 3) Seven lacked character empathy, and seven and eight should have been merged. 3) and the last episode needed to be split in two with more patient cuts, 3) you blew it with the closure on Harris’ character which needed him to find the port in his arm, so we could be confused about when he’d died rather than confused. So in retrospect, the season was ok, but (a) Wright isn’t Harris or Hopkins and couldn’t pull it off with the dialog you gave him (understandably) and didn’t fight you over it. (b) you didn’t put give enough frames for the actors to emote (and us to empathize) in the choppy episodes, and should have cut episode five and first half of six as unnecessary and self indulgent, (c) a split six and seven instead, then been more … loving … (paying attention) in nine and ten. … Yeah. I know. Luxury of hindsight but yo didn’t make these mistakes in the first season. Why? You weren’t stepping back enough. PLEASE DO NOT PULL A “LOST” ON US. -Thanks. )

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-27 19:10:08 UTC

  • “Scarcity is imposed with effort.”— That has to be the dumbest thing anyone ha

    —“Scarcity is imposed with effort.”—

    That has to be the dumbest thing anyone has had the ignorance or shamelessness to say to me all year.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-27 18:43:32 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1012043769527533568

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“Scarcity is imposed with effort.”— That

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“Scarcity is imposed with effort.”—

    That has to be the dumbest thing anyone has had the ignorance or shamelessness to say to me all year.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-06-27 18:43:21 UTC