Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • CONSTANT RELATIONS: CLASS VS CATEGORY —“One is the notion of category that add

    CONSTANT RELATIONS: CLASS VS CATEGORY

    —“One is the notion of category that addresses the building blocks of thought – which are the categories that are necessary for thinking, knowing, deciding, etc.”—

    I don’t know what building blocks of thought are.

    But as far as I know the process of precognitive, as well as cognitive categorization refers to identifying a set of constant relations. And as far as I know that’s all that can be said about them. This is the function of our physical layers of neurons: reducing sets of constant relations to increasing generalizations that increase the potential for associations, culminating the potential for intertemporal associations.

    Again. As far as i know, this is all that can be or need be said. we do not need the word ‘category’, which in original translation means something on the order of ‘accusation’ or ‘assertion’, or ‘name’:

    category (n.)

    1580s, from Middle French catégorie, from Late Latin categoria, from Greek kategoria “accusation, prediction, category,” verbal noun from kategorein “to speak against; to accuse, assert, predicate,” from kata “down to” (or perhaps “against;” see cata-) + agoreuein “to harangue, to declaim (in the assembly),” from agora “public assembly” (see agora).

    Original sense of “accuse” weakened to “assert, name” by the time Aristotle applied kategoria to his 10 classes of things that can be named.

    —“category should be used by no-one who is not prepared to state (1) that he does not mean class, & (2) that he knows the difference between the two”—- [Fowler]

    So I should probably be more cautious when I use the term, since class(invariant) is at least descriptive, and the relationship between class(invariant) and category (utilitarian or ‘discretionary’? ) is easier to understand, even if ‘set of constant relations’ is existential. So we can express constant relations as either a Class or a Category. I tend to think (and I should probably work on clarifying this a bit), but I use class for existential categories (science), and category for utilitarian (imagining, reasoning).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-28 18:24:00 UTC

  • “Sky Father”, Dyaus Pitar Zeus Pater Jupiter Odin God Truth Prometheus

    “Sky Father”,

    Dyaus Pitar

    Zeus Pater

    Jupiter

    Odin

    God

    Truth

    Prometheus

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 14:13:00 UTC

  • LOWER ORDER / HIGHER ORDER In my work I use the incremental, evolutionary, suppr

    LOWER ORDER / HIGHER ORDER

    In my work I use the incremental, evolutionary, suppression of parasitism in all its forms via natural judge discovered common law, as a means of causing the gradual increase in trust, and the gradual increase in the production of goods, at gradually increasing rates. (you can see this in Fukuyama’s work as well, although as an asian he prefers the monopoly bureaucracy instead of the western model of a market of sovereigns under the common law of sovereigns.)

    So I refer to higher orders as those with higher trust (lower corruption) and the corresponding institutions.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-27 08:22:00 UTC

  • Q: WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH SCALA (tech stuff) (scala) (state of software) Scala is

    Q: WHAT IS THE DEAL WITH SCALA

    (tech stuff) (scala) (state of software)

    Scala is an attempt to do with the java environment what is being done with the javascript environment: allow us to write with either functional or object oriented models, by creating functions as first order objects that can be passed to functions or classes. This process eliminates the problem of global variables, globally accessible functions, consumes less memory (copies), allows for easier disposal of memory, and reduces garbage collection.

    So you write a more hierarchical program and a less ‘collaborative’ one.

    While I like the idea of passing functions, and objects, and I like the idea of bringing the defensive memory technique of (academic and mathematical)functional programming to the mainstream, what I see in practice is a lot of unreadable, unmaintainable code.

    Thinking mathematically and thinking verbally are two different things, and in my experience two programing techniques are better suited to mathematical and scientific, and procedural and business applications.

    The problem is the browser, and the language. And at this point I think they’re doing damage to both. This certainly doesn’t feel like innovation to me. These techniques are archaic at this point. What it feels like is a lot of work to get around the problem of the slow rate of development of the browser and the language. And that means it’s time for a competitor to the browser and the language, and that’s what I expect to happen.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-25 07:41:00 UTC

  • FIVE PROPERTIES OF DEMONSTRATED INTELLIGENCE Demonstrated intelligence consists

    FIVE PROPERTIES OF DEMONSTRATED INTELLIGENCE

    Demonstrated intelligence consists of a set of primary functions any one of which will fail you, but if none of them fails, compensates substantially for differences in IQ.

    All people with demonstrated intelligence are the same, all demonstratedly unintelligent people are different.

    1 – Intelligence, esp, verbal. (rate you reduce information to patterns)

    2 – short term memory (the ability to maintain states, and therefore sustain comparative searches and comparisons)

    3 – general knowledge (inventory of patterns that intelligence can search for patterns)

    4 – “wants”, (wanting correspondence with or difference from reality, or force you to select general knowledge that confirms the biases.)

    5 – genetic intuitions (genetic influences that harmfully bias wants)

    If all of these work to some degree you will be functionally intelligent’ regardless of your IQ. If any one of these is substantially defective it will not matter what your IQ is.

    BY ANALOGY, DOMESTICATABLE ANIMALS:

    All domesticatable animals are the same, all undomesticatable animals are different.

    1 – cannot be picky eaters

    2 – reach maturity quickly

    3 – willing to breed in captivity

    4 – docile by nature

    5 – conform to a social hierarchy

    If any one of these fails the animal is not domesticatable (in numbers).

    BY ANALOGY, HAPPY FAMILIES

    “all happy families are the same, all unhappy families are different”. As Dostoyevsky stated, if any one of the criteria for a happy family is absent the family will be unhappy.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-23 17:12:00 UTC

  • WHAT’S “FAIR”? Q&A: What is ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’? — Jason Cockrell Fair (moral):

    WHAT’S “FAIR”?

    Q&A: What is ‘fair’ or ‘unfair’? — Jason Cockrell

    Fair (moral): reciprocity. meaning actions limited to (a) productive, (b) fully informed, (c) warrantied, (d) voluntary transfers, (e) limited to productive externalities.

    This prohibits profiting from another’s loss, and the construction of hazards: parasitism.

    It’s an easier comparison when we think of adult vs child (asymmetry of knowledge and understanding). We tend to be more ‘ok’ with fucking over other adults. We are not ‘ok’ with fucking over children.

    But this is because we falsely consider other adults ‘equal’ or ‘peers’ under christianity and the enlightenment. When in fact, the adult-child disparity in knowledge and understanding increases rapidly in a division of knowledge, and labor.

    I was taught ‘noblesse oblige’ which is that we don’t take advantage of the lower classes, but we hold those above us to the same standard we hold ourselves to in relation to those below us.

    Judgement flows downhill, and so does forgiveness. The ignorant cannot judge and since they cannot judge they cannot forgive.

    Hence the value of christianity in creating divisions of knowledge and labor.

    Christianity + Aristocracy is a good combination. Forgive because you cannot judge, and take responsibility, because you can judge.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-23 09:56:00 UTC

  • Dear media. It’s called “Disintermediation”. Cutting out the middle man

    Dear media.

    It’s called “Disintermediation”. Cutting out the middle man.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-22 20:46:00 UTC

  • USE TRUE AND LAWFUL, NOT LEGITIMATE (updated)(important) LAWS are moral(true) or

    USE TRUE AND LAWFUL, NOT LEGITIMATE

    (updated)(important)

    LAWS are moral(true) or not(false). They are constructed correctly(truthfully) or not(falsely).

    CONTRACTS are moral or immoral, Lawful or non-Lawful (capital L=Law Proper, lower l=legislation/command).

    Contracts can be constructed by a moral process(Truthfully and Lawfully), or an immoral process (Deceitfully and UnLawfully).

    Legitimacy is a justificationary moral term, just as Divinely is a theological term. it is a way of ‘hedging’ blame avoidance. The english word arises from a legitimate child: born of lawfully married parents.

    The use of the term ‘legitimate’ (lawful, according to rules) evolved in the sense that the authorities have license to exercise violence, or that the construction of some contract or process. Ergo it means ‘moral license’. And from there to reflect the superiority of democratic opinion over natural law. So the term has been, like ‘liberal’ devolved into ‘by popular consent’.

    In other words, in common language, it’s used as a soft-deception that claims moral intuition rather than moral truths justify the exercise of the resulting obligations and rights.

    Hence why I use true/truthful and legal/lawful not ‘legitimate’.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-21 12:44:00 UTC

  • THE HIERARCHY OF LIES – White Lie – gift a comfort – Grey Lie – obscure a guilt

    THE HIERARCHY OF LIES

    – White Lie – gift a comfort

    – Grey Lie – obscure a guilt

    – Black Lie – obtain a benefit

    – Evil Lie – cause a harm

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-21 12:24:00 UTC

  • CLASS AND MARRIAGE TYPES Think of ANF as an upper middle class or upper class ma

    CLASS AND MARRIAGE TYPES

    Think of ANF as an upper middle class or upper class marriage where there is a lot of property. It’s an aristocratic marriage technology.

    Think of NF as a middle class marriage.

    Think of Traditional Families as a working class marriage.

    Think of Serial Marriages as a lower class marriage.

    Marriage types evolved to balance insurance from families without much property (Traditional) to insurance from property (ANF).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-01-20 10:21:00 UTC