TESTIFY (v.)
late 14c., “give legal testimony, affirm the truth of, bear witness to;” of things, c. 1400, “serve as evidence of,” from Anglo-French testifier, from Latin testificari “bear witness, show, demonstrate,” also “call to witness,” from testis “a witness” (see testament) + root of facere “to make” (see factitious). Biblical sense of “openly profess one’s faith and devotion” is attested from 1520s. Related: Testified; testifying; testification.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 11:08:00 UTC
PHILOSOPHY
The search for internally consistent means of decidability within a domain or context.
TRUTH (PROPER)
The most parsimonious most universal method of decidability regardless of context.
SOME FORMS OF ARGUMENT
Analogy – a justification by similarity.
Reason – a criticized and justified argument from experience.
Rational – an internally consistent, non contradictory argument from experience
Logical – an internally consistent, non contradictory, argument from set membership.
Analytic – an internally consistent, non contradictory, verbally parsimonious, argument from set membership incorporating the methods of the physical sciences.
Empirical – a correlative externally correspondent argument for the purpose of limiting human error bias and deceit.
Operational – an internally consistent, existentially possible, subjectively testable, causal, argument from possibility.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 09:11:00 UTC
Terror requires the deliberate targeting of non-combatants as a means of altering policy. Sovereignty requires one’s government control non-state actors. Democracy requires one’s people control one’s government such that it controls non-state actors, such that it does not break the westphalian peace, nor the postwar peace. Justice visited upon the muslims to contain them just as the west tried to contain the communists in the twentieth century and the Islamic empires, for it’s thousand years of warfare against the west. And so apparently we must unify china, india, russia, and america to contain islam until it respects the peaces of westphalia (containing non state actors), and of the postwar consensus (maintian borders, develop human rights, and develop consumer economies).
No people yet has transformed from the medieval to the modern without a reformation, and some sort of civil war.
Islam is the only backward civilization remaining. The problem it faces, and south america faces, is that the demographics throughout the muslim world make a rational secular state nearly impossible without the promise of ever-expanding growth under fiat money capitalism.
Source date (UTC): 2017-03-04 08:04:00 UTC
Races refer to visible differences in physical characteristics that define one as kin or non-kin, and causes us to respond according to our sensitivity to kin selection.
We generally divide people in to major races (four), sub-races (at least thirty), and then into regional or tribal groups, and then into clan, groups.
So the axis of decidability in race is kin selection: demonstration of genetic affiliation in association, cooperation, reproduction, production, politics, ‘religion’, and war.
By contrast, a ‘population group’ is a political and demographic term, invented in the era of ‘political correctness’ as an alternative to the use of the word ‘race’ or ‘subrace’, or ‘mixed race’ primarily because of crossbreeding that is producing various overlapping subgroups in this period of world migrations. It is not a term that refers to the demonstration of kin selection behavior by humans (and all other animals).
So as far as I know “population group” is a catch all term for the current era and the correct terminology for any subset would simply be “population sub group”, or whatever variation you feel you audience would comprehend. And I would recommend resisting the temptation to creative terminology that attempts to add scientific categorization for that which we cannot currently categorize.
https://www.quora.com/Is-there-a-biological-category-between-race-and-population-group
As we developed polities, economies, empires, and civilizations we cooperate in greater numbers, with greater anonymity, first across families, then tribes, then nations, and then races.
People in every region, in every race, in every era act POLITICALLY as a group even if they act pragmatically when acting individually in daily life.
The more possible it is to use political, economic, or military power to increase status for a group, the more likely it is to cause racial tensions.
Those states that have been most successful at minimizing racial and tribal tensions have been those that preserve majority control of political, economic, and military institutions such that while people may cooperate as individuals, they cannot compete as groups.
https://www.quora.com/How-does-civilization-lead-to-racism
SYNONYMS
Altruism(direct), Morality(indirect), Virtue(long term)
a) find an example of altruism that is not an example of kin selection. (you won’t)
b) find an example of morality that is not an example of investing in future reciprocity (you won’t)
c) find an example of virtue that is not an example of bearing a cost (‘banking’). you won’t.
It should be fairly obvious after making a few lists of a/b/c that this is the same question at three different scales.
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-28 15:29:00 UTC
PROPERTARIANISM: DataTypes, Operations, Grammar, Syntax
Think of Propertarianism as a programming language consisting of data types, operations, grammar, and syntax.
if you can ‘write a program’ that ‘computes’ (is operationally constructable’) with those data types, operations, grammar, and syntax, then you can write a formal description of any phenomenon open to human experience in the language of natural law.
You cannot do math without understanding it, and you can’t write software without understanding it, and you can’t write natural law without understanding it.
I mean… you’d honestly have to be a simpleton to think that you’re going to learn this FAST. you’ll learn it as fast as you could learn to program. If you can program you can simply do it faster because you’ve learned VERY SIMPLE VERSIONS of the form of operational logic of transformations that exist in propertarianism: Natural Law
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-25 21:58:00 UTC
https://propertarianism.com/2015/07/27/a-short-course-in-propertarian-morality-2/—“CURT: PLEASE DEFINE “COMMONS”—
COMMONS – Originally, meaning Land or resources belonging to or affecting the whole of a community. More articulately: any form of property to which members of a group share an interests, because of bearing a cost to obtain that interest, but where that interest is obtained by an unspecified membership in the group rather than by explicit possession of title. I use this term to refer to both physical commons, normative commons, institutional commons, and informational commons. The problem we face with commons is that without explicitly issued shares, even un-tradable shares, the ownership of the commons cannot be protected from confiscation by various means including immigration, or political confiscation.
See Also
DEMONSTRATED PROPERTY RIGHTS AND OBLIGATIONS
https://propertarianism.com/2015/07/27/property-rights-and-obligations/
A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN MORALITY
https://propertarianism.com/2015/07/27/a-short-course-in-propertarian-morality-2/
A SHORT COURSE IN PROPERTARIAN REASONING
https://propertarianism.com/2015/09/26/a-short-course-in-propertarian-reasoning/
(Honestly people, the accusation that this isn’t accessible is simply untrue. It isn’t in COURSE form, but all the insights are there to consume as fairly simple series (lists). The ‘book’ is up there. The courses are not. )
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-25 21:40:00 UTC
TERMS: FULL ACCOUNTING VS FULL VS PERFECT RECIPROCITY
—“Describe what you mean by “FULL reciprocity” if you would.”—
“Without having to make an excuse for an involuntary imposition of costs in either direction” , I sometimes use the term ‘perfect reciprocity’ which is technically impossible,but is less confusing. The possible term is full accounting (what is possible), not ideal accounting(what is perfect).
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-25 19:28:00 UTC
AGENCY
—“The capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices subject to personal or external limitations. By contrast, *structure* refers to those factors that determine or limit an individual and his or her decisions, such as gender, social class, ethnicity, religion, customs, education, economic institutions, government, propaganda, ability, knowledge, ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, and deceit. Meaning that one’s agency is determined by the combination of beneficial institutions, abilities, and knowledge and inhibiting institutions, abilities, and knowledge”—
Source date (UTC): 2017-02-24 12:10:00 UTC