Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • A Rose By Any Other Name: Aristocratic Egalitarianism And Propertarianism

    —“Q&A: Curt, How Do We Refer To Your Work: Propertarianism or Aristocratic Egalitarianism”— In my view (which may or may not be right) I have written down in rational and scientific terms, the western group evolutionary strategy – the philosophy of the west.

    But it’s a very big scope of work. So what you call it depends upon which perspective you’re looking at it from. Culturally and civilizationally, it’s the philosophy of the west: aristocratic egalitarianism. a set of values: Aristocratic, and the criteria for membership: open to anyone who will fight. But if we are to ask what operations and processes do we use within aristocratic egalitarianism that refers to The metaphysics of action, Testimonial Truth and Epistemology, Propertarian Ethics, Market Government, and Aristocratic Ethics (excellence in man) To make things ‘simple’ for people to understand we use the term ‘Propertarianism’ as a shortcut, even though that only technically refers to the ethical component of Aristocratic Egalitarianism. We have debated using Testimonialism in order to place truth above property, but this term borders on the platonic, so we prefer the ‘real’ – propertarianism as a ‘common’ name for philosophical arguments that constitute the cultural strategy of the western indo European people we call Aryans: Aristocratic Egalitarianism. So that’s the full explanation. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute The Philosophy of Aristocracy Kiev, Ukraine

  • Sequences

    SEQUENCE:

    1. COMPUTABLE (DETERMINISTIC),
    2. CALCULABLE (NON-COMPUTABLE/DEDUCTIVE/LOGICAL)
    3. RATIONAL (INDUCTIVE/NON-CONTRADICTORY),
    4. IMAGINABLE (ABDUCTIVE/VAGUELY ASSOCIABLE).
    5. IRRATIONAL (UNIMAGINABLE / INASSOCIABLE )

  • Sequences

    SEQUENCE:

    1. COMPUTABLE (DETERMINISTIC),
    2. CALCULABLE (NON-COMPUTABLE/DEDUCTIVE/LOGICAL)
    3. RATIONAL (INDUCTIVE/NON-CONTRADICTORY),
    4. IMAGINABLE (ABDUCTIVE/VAGUELY ASSOCIABLE).
    5. IRRATIONAL (UNIMAGINABLE / INASSOCIABLE )

  • The Correct Answer To “What Are Human Rights”

    *(Answers to this question show the tragedy of a late 20th-century education.)*Necessary (Correct) Definitions:Right: a contractual obligation by another party to perform some actions, and refrain from other actions Negative Right: a contractual obligation by another party to refrain from actions: to forgo opportunities for gains. Positive Right: a contractual obligation by another party to perform actions: to bear costs, and to forgo opportunity for ‘defection’ (cheating). Existential Rights: Rights exist only when (a) obtained in contractual exchange, and (b) are enforceable in matters of dispute by a third party ‘insurer’. (throughout most of history the ‘government’ is the insurer of last resort. Rights do not exist then, they must be existentially created by the construction of an insurer (usually government). Desired Right: A right that you wish to possess if you can find (a) a party to exchange it with you and (b) an enforcer (insurer) of those rights once you negotiated them. Hierarchy of Rights: 1. – **Normative** (norms, manners, ethics, morals), 2. – **Contractual: **(from promise to formal document) 3. – **Political Right **(political): …..1. Law proper (discovered), …..2. Legislation (negotiated), …..3. Regulation (commanded) 4. – Human Rights (inter-state): Human rights were an attempt by western nations in the post-colonial and post-war era to set the terms by which governments would respect the sovereignty(esp. borders) of other governments. In other words, it was an attempt to prevent horrors of primitive and developing countries, contain the horrors of communism, constrain expansionist governments, and set the purpose of government to the improvement of the condition of its citizens. 5. – Natural Rights (~scientifically necessary): Those rights necessary for the evolution of voluntary organization of production of goods and services (capitalism) in the absence of parasitism and predation by organizations whether public or private. All natural rights are negative rights, since we can only equally refrain from action, because we are unequally able to act, and unequally can control resources necessary for action. Human rights are necessary rights – those necessary for human freedom from predation – that any government must seek to produce for its citizens (act as a guarantor) if that government wishes to preserve it’s sovereignty from actions against it by those signatories of the contract for human rights: the insurers of last resort. ALL NATURAL (POSSIBLE AND NECESSARY) RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSIBLE AS “RECIPROCATED PROPERTY RIGHTS” All Natural Rights are expressible as property rights that we reciprocally grant one another: rights to non imposition of costs against life, liberty, and property. (Which was the original wording of the US Constitution.) All moral codes are also expressible as property rights, for those actions unknown to affected parties. All ethical codes are expressible as property rights for those actions between parties where knowledge is asymmetrically distributed. The difference between human rights (political) and natural rights (scientific) is that to mollify the communists and obtain their signatures the articles in the 20’s were added that mandated positive rights. These rights cannot be brought into existence without violating all other rights. This is why they do not and cannot exist. The only rights we can grant each other are **negative**, because we can only equally possess the ability to refrain from action. We create (organize) governments in order to create property rights. To create an insurer of our life(existence), liberty(action), and property(inventory) Everything else we say about it is some form of colorful deception. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • The Correct Answer To “What Are Human Rights”

    *(Answers to this question show the tragedy of a late 20th-century education.)*Necessary (Correct) Definitions:Right: a contractual obligation by another party to perform some actions, and refrain from other actions Negative Right: a contractual obligation by another party to refrain from actions: to forgo opportunities for gains. Positive Right: a contractual obligation by another party to perform actions: to bear costs, and to forgo opportunity for ‘defection’ (cheating). Existential Rights: Rights exist only when (a) obtained in contractual exchange, and (b) are enforceable in matters of dispute by a third party ‘insurer’. (throughout most of history the ‘government’ is the insurer of last resort. Rights do not exist then, they must be existentially created by the construction of an insurer (usually government). Desired Right: A right that you wish to possess if you can find (a) a party to exchange it with you and (b) an enforcer (insurer) of those rights once you negotiated them. Hierarchy of Rights: 1. – **Normative** (norms, manners, ethics, morals), 2. – **Contractual: **(from promise to formal document) 3. – **Political Right **(political): …..1. Law proper (discovered), …..2. Legislation (negotiated), …..3. Regulation (commanded) 4. – Human Rights (inter-state): Human rights were an attempt by western nations in the post-colonial and post-war era to set the terms by which governments would respect the sovereignty(esp. borders) of other governments. In other words, it was an attempt to prevent horrors of primitive and developing countries, contain the horrors of communism, constrain expansionist governments, and set the purpose of government to the improvement of the condition of its citizens. 5. – Natural Rights (~scientifically necessary): Those rights necessary for the evolution of voluntary organization of production of goods and services (capitalism) in the absence of parasitism and predation by organizations whether public or private. All natural rights are negative rights, since we can only equally refrain from action, because we are unequally able to act, and unequally can control resources necessary for action. Human rights are necessary rights – those necessary for human freedom from predation – that any government must seek to produce for its citizens (act as a guarantor) if that government wishes to preserve it’s sovereignty from actions against it by those signatories of the contract for human rights: the insurers of last resort. ALL NATURAL (POSSIBLE AND NECESSARY) RIGHTS ARE EXPRESSIBLE AS “RECIPROCATED PROPERTY RIGHTS” All Natural Rights are expressible as property rights that we reciprocally grant one another: rights to non imposition of costs against life, liberty, and property. (Which was the original wording of the US Constitution.) All moral codes are also expressible as property rights, for those actions unknown to affected parties. All ethical codes are expressible as property rights for those actions between parties where knowledge is asymmetrically distributed. The difference between human rights (political) and natural rights (scientific) is that to mollify the communists and obtain their signatures the articles in the 20’s were added that mandated positive rights. These rights cannot be brought into existence without violating all other rights. This is why they do not and cannot exist. The only rights we can grant each other are **negative**, because we can only equally possess the ability to refrain from action. We create (organize) governments in order to create property rights. To create an insurer of our life(existence), liberty(action), and property(inventory) Everything else we say about it is some form of colorful deception. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine

  • Testimony: A Recipe For The Reconstruction Of Experience Correspondent With Reality

    “Testimony: A Recipe for the Reconstruction of Experience, provided with warranty of due diligence against error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience, and deceit.” “Truth: A perfectly parsimonious recipe for the construction of experience given perfect information such that error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience and deceit are impossible. For the simple reason that language consists of general terms (distributions so to speak), Man cannot know the truth even if he speaks it, but he can speak truthfully, and we can test whether his testimony reconstructs an experience we find equally correspondent to the subject.

  • Testimony: A Recipe For The Reconstruction Of Experience Correspondent With Reality

    “Testimony: A Recipe for the Reconstruction of Experience, provided with warranty of due diligence against error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience, and deceit.” “Truth: A perfectly parsimonious recipe for the construction of experience given perfect information such that error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience and deceit are impossible. For the simple reason that language consists of general terms (distributions so to speak), Man cannot know the truth even if he speaks it, but he can speak truthfully, and we can test whether his testimony reconstructs an experience we find equally correspondent to the subject.

  • DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF ALT-RIGHT? No. New Right. Alt right is a resistance mov

    DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF ALT-RIGHT?

    No. New Right. Alt right is a resistance movement not a revolutionary one. Complaints not solutions. I do solutions.

    DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A WHITE NATIONALIST?

    No. I take the position that familism, tribalism, nationalism, under natural law will produce the best outcomes for each family, tribe, nation, and race. And as such all can transcend the animal we call man.

    DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A NATIONAL SOCIALIST?

    No. Although I do feel that despite its terrible economics that it was one of the greatest and most beautiful ambitions ever created by man – until they adopted propaganda, pseudoscience, and outright lying.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-30 07:57:00 UTC

  • CHOICE VS DECIDABILITY We often conflate these two terms when they refer to very

    CHOICE VS DECIDABILITY

    We often conflate these two terms when they refer to very different conditions.

    We CHOOSE PREFERENCES, but TRUTHS are DECIDABLE.

    Choosing a preference requires that you contribute information to a comparison in order to make a choice, because only your preference provided decidability between members of a comparison.

    Deciding whether a statement is true or not requires that you can decide between members of a comparison WITHOUT contributing information in order to make a decision, and where your preference is irrelevant.

    Choice = Preference (or undecidable).

    Decidability = Truth (or not), regardless of preference.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-28 02:19:00 UTC

  • Q&A: “CURT: WHAT DOES TALEB’S ANTI-FRAGILE MEAN?” It means very simply the follo

    Q&A: “CURT: WHAT DOES TALEB’S ANTI-FRAGILE MEAN?”

    It means very simply the following:

    Unlike physical objects, organisms and networks of organisms, strengthen themselves by allocating resources to different systems when they are subject to a variety of stresses and shocks, but does not devote resources when subject to continuous stimuli in the absence of stresses and shocks – the regularity we have produced and desire to produce in industrial-era modernity creates disinformation in biological systems, and as a consequence, fragility, and worse, fragility-cascades.

    This applies to individual organisms (cells), communities of organisms (organs), entities (living creatures), Communities (schools, flocks, packs, herds, tribes etc), the organizations(people) we build together, the institutions(human processes) we build together, and the information(knowledge) we build together.

    Unfortunately, we humans seek to computationally (rationally) make life easier for ourselves by creating regularity (predictability) for ourselves – but it is regularity that weakens us.

    Over the past century, in all the social ‘sciences’ including finance, economics, politics, and law, we have been practicing pseudoscience by calculating probabilities instead of calculating fragilities – when it is unpredictable, large, irregularities or events that cause fragile systems to fail catastrophically causing cascades of externalities.

    Instead of, or in addition to, calculating probabilities (optimistic bias), we could calculate fragility(pessimistic bias). And expend resources on ensuring against fragility-cascades in the face of black swan events.

    In my work among other things, I argue that truthfulness demands that we do both: “full accounting” (full disclosure). And that we can and should use the law to protect the informational commons from pollution (legal “Abusus”) just as we protect the air, sea, land, flora, fauna, and our arts and monuments.

    The “Leftist” counter proposition is that as long as one has the ability to print money then all shocks can be overcome. And that the good done in the interim compensates for the bad produced later on, and that we are wealthier later on and can fix those consequences. (I agree with Taleb in particular regarding the mainstream left economists he criticizes. Although I think I probably say so in different terms.)

    But this has turned out to be false in finance and economics since 2008. The Austrian’s were right. All we do is kick the can further down the road. In my work, I try to show that we have done the same to genetic, normative, institutional, monumental, and territorial capital. And that while our financial system is fragile, and it will break first, the rest of the systems are equally fragile now.

    Which is why I argue we civil or international war is both easy to envision because of the fear caused by fragility, and the consequences unimaginable enough to be just ‘terrifying’.

    Cheers

    (More on similarities between Taleb and Doolittle here:)

    https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10154574171777264

    Source date (UTC): 2016-09-27 07:59:00 UTC