DEFINE “LEFTIST”: A DISCOURSE WITH CHATGPT
User (CurtD)
Define leftist.
ChatGPT
The term “leftist” broadly refers to political positions, ideologies, and movements that emphasize social equality, communal welfare, and the redistribution of resources. It is often contrasted with… https://twitter.com/ovierocks1/status/1733766001727094981
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-10 15:43:55 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1733875197902557512
THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN VOLUNTARY (volition) AND CONSENSUAL (consent)
‘Voluntary’ is the via positiva of the via negativa ‘Coercive’. So voluntary means ‘not coercive’. We’ve standardized on the use of voluntary because of the legal tradition of the term.
Consensual is a term between parties, voluntary is a term independent of other parties. As such voluntary accommodates externalities where consent does not.
The terms “voluntary” and “consensual” both relate to actions or agreements that involve the willingness and agreement of individuals, but they have subtle differences in meaning and usage. Let’s compare and contrast these two terms:
Voluntary:
Definition: “Voluntary” refers to something that is done or undertaken by a person’s own choice and free will, without external coercion, pressure, or force. It implies that the individual acted without being compelled or forced to do so.
Usage: The term “voluntary” is often used in a broad context to describe actions, behaviors, or decisions made without external influence. For example, volunteering for a charity, donating to a cause, or participating in an activity out of one’s own choice are considered voluntary actions.
Legal and Ethical Implications: In legal and ethical contexts, voluntary actions are typically viewed positively because they reflect individual autonomy and freedom of choice. Consent may also be a part of voluntary actions, but the emphasis is on the absence of coercion.
Consensual:
Definition: “Consensual” specifically refers to situations where two or more parties agree or give their mutual consent to engage in a particular activity, relationship, or contract. It implies that all parties involved have willingly and knowingly agreed to the terms or actions.
Usage: The term “consensual” is often used in situations where informed and mutual agreement is crucial. For example, in legal contexts, consensual relationships, such as consensual sex or consensual contracts, emphasize that all parties involved have willingly agreed without any form of deception or coercion.
Legal and Ethical Implications: Consent and consensual agreements are essential in various legal and ethical contexts to protect individuals’ rights and ensure that they are not subjected to unwanted or non-consensual actions. Consent is a key component of consensual agreements, and these agreements are typically legally binding.
In summary, while both “voluntary” and “consensual” involve individual choice and willingness, “voluntary” emphasizes actions or decisions made without external influence, while “consensual” specifically emphasizes mutual agreement between parties. “Consensual” is often used in contexts where ensuring informed agreement is critical, such as in legal agreements or relationships.
Reply addressees: @Lord__Sousa
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-04 17:04:31 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1731721152379211776
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1731665645639516391
WHISKEY IS THE WATER OF LIFE? 😉
whiskey (n.)
1715, from Gaelic uisge beatha “whisky,” literally “water of life,” from Old Irish uisce “water” (from PIE *ud-skio-, suffixed form of root *wed- (1) “water; wet”) + bethu “life” (from PIE *gwi-wo-tut-, suffixed form of *gwi-wo-, from root *gwei- “to live”).
Whiskey is a distilled spirit made from fermented grain mash. The first distillation of whiskey as we know it today took place in Scotland or Ireland in the early 1000s AD
According to Barnhart, the Gaelic is probably a loan-translation of Medieval Latin aqua vitae, which had been applied to intoxicating drinks since early 14c. (compare French eau de vie “brandy”).
Other early spellings in English include usquebea (1706) and iskie bae (1580s). In Ireland and Scotland obtained from malt; in the U.S. commonly made from corn or rye. Spelling distinction between Scotch whisky and Irish and American whiskey is a 19c. innovation.
The earliest certain chemical distillations were by Greeks in Alexandria in the 1st century AD, but these were not distillations of alcohol. The medieval Arabs adopted the distillation technique of the Alexandrian Greeks, and written records in Arabic begin in the 9th century, but again these were not distillations of alcohol. Distilling technology passed from the medieval Arabs to the medieval Latins, with the earliest records in Latin in the early 12th century.
The earliest records of the distillation of alcohol are in Italy in the 13th century, where alcohol was distilled from wine. An early description of the technique was given by Ramon Llull (1232–1315). Its use spread through medieval monasteries, largely for medicinal purposes, such as the treatment of colic and smallpox.
The art of distillation spread to Ireland and Scotland no later than the 15th century, as did the common European practice of distilling “aqua vitae”, spirit alcohol, primarily for medicinal purposes. The practice of medicinal distillation eventually passed from a monastic setting to the secular via professional medical practitioners of the time, The Guild of Barber Surgeons.
The earliest mention of whiskey in Ireland comes from the Annals of Clonmacnoise, which attributes the death of a chieftain in 1405 to “taking a surfeit of aqua vitae” at Christmas. In Scotland, the first evidence of whisky production comes from an entry in the Exchequer Rolls for 1495 where malt is sent “To Friar John Cor, by order of the king, to make aquavitae”, enough to make about 500 bottles.
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-02 20:06:53 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1731042273951940608
—‘Because of the Science, nobody can understand us. We’re the weird one’s.”—
weird (adj.)
c. 1400, “having power to control fate,” from wierd (n.), from Old English wyrd “fate, chance, fortune; destiny; the Fates,” literally “that which comes,” from Proto-Germanic *wurthiz (source also of Old Saxon wurd, Old High German wurt “fate,” Old Norse urðr “fate, one of the three Norns”), from PIE *wert- “to turn, to wind,” (source also of German werden, Old English weorðan “to become”), from root *wer- (2) “to turn, bend.” For the sense development from “turning” to “becoming,” compare phrase turn into “become.”
The sense of “uncanny, supernatural” developed from Middle English use of weird sisters for the three Fates or Norns (in Germanic mythology), the goddesses who controlled human destiny. They were portrayed as odd or frightening in appearance, as in “Macbeth” (and especially in 18th and 19th century productions of it), which led to the adjectival meaning “odd-looking, uncanny” (1815); “odd, strange, disturbingly different” (1820). Also see Macbeth. Related: Weirdly; weirdness.
also from c. 1400
Source date (UTC): 2023-12-02 19:57:19 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1731039863204360192
Well capitalism is a slur. If you have rule of law of natural law then the only possible behavior is market behavior. If you have capitalism as an ideology it evades those limits. If you are a leftist (liar) you call it capitalism as if it’s an ideology rather than rule of law as…
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-06 16:13:58 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1721561571439018071
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1721423272641020340
(The term “race” was often used to refer to a people. It was only with darwins unification of the world that we came to see the four priomary races of man. So it depends on the usage. If we are strict no, if traditional yes.)
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-05 19:06:20 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1721242563506569392
Reply addressees: @DustinofApollon @99MO23
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1721233830403776923
DISAMBIGUATION: COOPERATION
(from the archives)
DEFINITION
Cooperation consists of increases in the production of returns on time by the discovery of a coincidence of wants, and agreement on mutual pursuit of the same ends (rewards), in a division of labor, given the non linear increases in returns (extraordinary) made possible by that division of labor, that is preferable by the parties to alternative uses of their time.
The Evolution of Cooperation:
1) Acquisitiveness: To survive and reproduce, humans must acquire and inventory many categories of resources, and evolved to demonstrate constant acquisitiveness of those resources.
2) Demonstgrated Interests(“property”): The scope of those things they act upon, or choose not to act upon, in anticipation of obtaining as inventory (a store of value), constitute their demonstrated definition of property-en-toto.* (See Butler Schaeffer) “That which and organism defends.”
3) Value: Human emotions evolved to reflect changes in state of demonstrated interests. As such nearly all emotions can be expressed in terms of reactions to property. (imposed costs here, pre-moral, but also pre-cooperation, and only defense and retaliation, not cooperation)
4) Non-Conflict: That which humans act to obtain without imposition upon in-group members they evolved to intuit as their demonstrated interests (property), and demonstrate this intuition by defense of their inventory, and by their punishment of transgressors.
5) Cooperative Production: That which humans act in concert with one another to produce a change in state that is prefereable to other potential changes in state at some point in time.
6) Moral (cooperative) Intuitions(instincts): Moral intuitions reflect prohibitions on free riding by members with whom one cooperates in production and reproduction. (This is where free riding enters.)
7) Distribution of Intuitions by Reproductive Strategy: Moral intuitions vary in intensity to suit one’s reproductive strategy. This intensity and distribution of moral intuition varies between males and females, as well as between classes and between groups.
8) Variation By Family Structure: Moral rules reflect prohibitions on free riding given the structure of the family in relation to the necessary and available structure of production.
9) Resolution of Disputes: Property rights were developed in law as the positive enumeration in contractual form, of those moral rules which any polity (corporation) agrees to enforce with the promise of violence for the purpose of restitution or punishment. Conversely, any possible property rights not expressed, the community (corporation) is unwilling to adjudicate, restore or punish, or has not yet discovered the need to construct.
10) Instrumentation: Property rights are necessary for the instrumental measurement of moral prohibitions because of the unobservability of changes in human emotional states, and our inability to determine truth from falsehood. And as such we require an observable proxy for evidence of changes in state.
11) Family: As a general rule, as the division of knowledge and labor increases, so must the atomicity of property rights, and as a consequence, the size of the family must decline {Consanguineous, Punaluan, Pairing (Serial Marriage), Hetaeristic, Traditional, Stem, Nuclear, Absolute Nuclear}.
12) Transaction Costs: As the division of labor increases, relationships increase in distance from kin, increase in anonymity, decrease common interest, and the incentive to seize opportunities rather than adhere to agreements increases. This decrease creates the problem of trust, which increases costs of insuring any agreement is fulfilled, and decreases the overall number of possible agreements and the number of participants in any structure of production.
13) Trust (ethics in production): As a general rule, for the size of the family to decrease, and division of labor to increase in multi-part complexity then trust must increase, and trust can only increase with expansion of property rights to include prohibitions on unethical actions. Mere ostracization, boycotting and reputation are insufficient to preserve agreements (contracts).
14) Moral Competition (ethics in political production): (morals property rights, cheating) As a general rule, the scope of moral prohibitions expressed as property rights, must increase to limit demand for authority.
15) Demand for Authority: As a general rule, if a delay in the production of property rights evolves, then demand for authority will fill the vacuum with some form of authority to either suppress retaliation (conflict) or to prevent circumstances leading to conflict, or both.
THE REASONS FOR THE EVOLUTION OF COOPERATION
INGROUP COOPERATION
1) The disproportionately high return on cooperation.
2) The differences in abilities at different ages.
3) The difference in reproductive role and strategy between the genders.
4) The differences in abilities among men.
5) The local structure of production: the division of knowledge and labor.
6) The local structure of the reproduction: family and inheritance rights.
7) The distribution of property rights between the individual, family, group and the commons.
8) The degree of suppression of, and intolerance for, free riding both in and out of family.
9) calculative, cooperative technology available for economic signaling and coordination. (objective truth, numbers, money, prices, interest, writing, contract, and accounting).
10) The use of formal institutions to perpetuate these constraints.
11) The competition from groups with alternate structures of production, family, inheritance, property rights, free riding, cooperative technologies, and formal institutions.
OUTGROUP COOPERATION
12) The geographical distribution of nature-given factors of production. (note that this is last.)
PROPERTY RIGHT
OBVERSE: A prohibition on the imposition of costs against those categories of property that in-group members are willing to enforce by means of organized violence.
REVERSE: a warranty by peers (right) that they will either enforce restitution for impositions of costs upon certain categories of your property, and/or that they will not retaliate against you for your acts of retaliation or restitution for such impositions.
RESULT?
(i) PROPERTY: that which we demonstrate that we have born costs to acquire without imposing costs upon others with whom we cooperate.
(ii) COOPERATION: constructing an asymmetry of incentives such that we choose to concentrate efforts by dividing labor in order to obtain the disproportionate rewards of doing so versus the alternatives.
(iii) MORALITY: that which we require in order to rationally cooperate.
(iv) RIGHT: Sanction of retaliation in case of abridgment. OBLIGATION: Requirement of performance.
(v) LAW (PROPERTY RIGHT): that which we promise to one another to insure.
—END OF ANALYSIS–
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-04 17:09:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720850845363834880
PERFORMATIVE TRUTH VS IDEAL TRUTH
Performative (Real) Truth can and must only mean testimony that as been subject to due diligence and is unambiguous, consistent, correspondent, and coherent under the constraints of naturalism – meaning it is sufficient for the provision of decidabilty within the limits of tolerable fallibility (infallibility) and therefore liabilty, in the context in question – acknowledging that we are possessed of imperfect knowledge and imperfect ability.
Ideal truth is that same testimony we would give if we were possessed of perfect knowledge and perfect ability – which we may strive for but only over long periods achieve.
While he understood the problem, understood how the greeks solved it, Nietzche failed in his mission at either restoration or innovation. Ih this example, a cockroach is a threat and a butterfly is an opportunity. There is nothing aesthetic (relative) about it other than our knowledge of understanding of risk and reward.
Reply addressees: @Alexanderistalt @seracoate @MillionMustMeme
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-03 17:01:48 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720486445104652288
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720477941539213629
UNDERSTAND: MEDIAN INCOME VS MEDIAN HOUSEHOLD INCOME (VS AVERAGE)
The median income and median household income in the USA for 2023 are as follows:
Median Income: The median income across the country is $44,225. 11% of americans do not live in households.
Median Household Income:… https://twitter.com/MonacoAlways/status/1720478035357405344
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-03 16:43:56 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720481951067291972
ETYMOLOGY OF THE WORD “SLAVE”
The word “slave” entered the English language in the late 13th century and is derived from the early medieval Latin word “sclavus,” which meant “Slav.”
The connection between the term “Slav” and “slave” can be traced back to the medieval slave trade. During the 9th century and onwards, many Slavs were captured and enslaved during the conquests of the Holy Roman Empire in Eastern Europe (Particularly Bosnia) and by the Ottoman Turks in Southeastern Europe, among other military campaigns.
The Slavic people became synonymous with servitude to such a degree that the ethnic name “Slav” became the root word for “slave” in various Western European languages, reflecting the heavy trading and use of Slavic people as slaves during that period.
GREEK, ROMAN, AND EARLY GERMANIC TERMS
The terms for “slave” in ancient Greek, Roman Latin, and early Germanic languages reflect different nuances and origins related to the concept of slavery in these cultures:
Ancient Greek: The term δοῦλος (doulos) was used to refer to a slave. In ancient Greece, slaves could be war captives, people who were enslaved due to debt, or born into slavery. The term encompasses a range of servile conditions, from chattel slavery to more domestic and integrated societal roles.
Roman Latin: The Romans used the word servus for a slave. Slavery in ancient Rome was deeply integrated into the society and economy. Slaves were a significant part of the workforce, coming from various sources, including war captives, piracy, and trade networks. (They had rights)
Early Germanic: The early Germanic term for a slave was þræll in Old Norse, which evolved into “thrall” in Old English. The Germanic tribes had a system of servitude that could involve bondage due to debt, capture in warfare, or birth into a servile class. The term thrall denotes a person who is in bondage or servitude. (They had rights)
Each term reflects a somewhat different understanding and social integration of the concept of slavery. The Greek and Roman terms have directly influenced later European languages, whereas the early Germanic term has somewhat different connotations and is less directly visible in modern English, except as a historical or literary reference.
Source date (UTC): 2023-11-02 17:36:42 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1720132842607218688