Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • Truth: Doing The Laundry of Imagination

    [T]ruth: Laundering Error, Bias, Imaginary Content, Wishful Thinking, and Deceit from our free associations, hypothesis, theories, and laws. Source: Curt Doolittle

  • Obverse / Reverse. ——————————— Silver Rule / Golden Rule.

    Obverse / Reverse.

    ———————————

    Silver Rule / Golden Rule.

    Act to Obtain / Act to Defend

    Non-Parasitism / Property

    Freedom to / Freedom From

    Obligation / Right

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-03 02:11:00 UTC

  • So natural and human rights represent a request to construct, not a description

    So natural and human rights represent a request to construct, not a description of what exists supernaturally.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-02 16:41:23 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616647870440177664

    Reply addressees: @ne0colonial @soapjackal

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616624137352675328

    IN REPLY TO:

    Original post on X

    Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616624137352675328

  • Rights: obtained in contractual exchange. Natural rts: necessary rts for non-con

    Rights: obtained in contractual exchange. Natural rts: necessary rts for non-conflict. Human rts: state-to-state.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-02 14:36:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616616366364340224

    Reply addressees: @soapjackal @ne0colonial

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616589790046130177

    IN REPLY TO:

    @soapjackal

    @ne0colonial @curtdoolittle this is where I get the underpinnings of the theory
    https://t.co/vXu2XSteaX

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/616589790046130177

  • “I’m a libertarian: an advocate for aristocratic liberty: the elimination of dem

    –“I’m a libertarian: an advocate for aristocratic liberty: the elimination of demand for authority by the total prohibition on parasitism and free riding. Anarchy and liberty and nomocracy are synonyms. But Rothbardian libertinism is not logically or empirically a means for eliminating the state. It’s a means of increasing demand for it.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2015-07-01 11:59:00 UTC

  • Sorry: Propertarianism is an Amoral and Objective Language – And That Can Be Emotionally Unsatisfying.

    [I] know that you want to feel emotionally vindicated, and that you want to vent your frustrations when conducting an argument, but the fact of the matter is Propertarianism and Testimonialism are constructed amorally (( amoral adjective “not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral.” )) so that all moral propositions can be objectively described, and all moral questions are objectively decidable. Propertarianism(ethics) and Testimonialism (epistemology) let you construct and win arguments wherein the other party is using various means of deception in order to obscure their advocacy for thefts. So, assuming you’re right (and conservatives are usually right, even if argumentatively incompetent) then using Testimonialism and Propertarianism will allow you to win arguments. But unlike simple (cheap) quips, they are expensive arguments to construct and require that you have a bit of skill. And if that isn’t enough. Well. You don’t have reason to feel good, or to win.  We leave that to the liars and theives.

  • Sorry: Propertarianism is an Amoral and Objective Language – And That Can Be Emotionally Unsatisfying.

    [I] know that you want to feel emotionally vindicated, and that you want to vent your frustrations when conducting an argument, but the fact of the matter is Propertarianism and Testimonialism are constructed amorally (( amoral adjective “not involving questions of right or wrong; without moral quality; neither moral nor immoral.” )) so that all moral propositions can be objectively described, and all moral questions are objectively decidable. Propertarianism(ethics) and Testimonialism (epistemology) let you construct and win arguments wherein the other party is using various means of deception in order to obscure their advocacy for thefts. So, assuming you’re right (and conservatives are usually right, even if argumentatively incompetent) then using Testimonialism and Propertarianism will allow you to win arguments. But unlike simple (cheap) quips, they are expensive arguments to construct and require that you have a bit of skill. And if that isn’t enough. Well. You don’t have reason to feel good, or to win.  We leave that to the liars and theives.

  • Definition of Class: Reproductive Value

    (profound) (complete decidability) (objective morality)  [S]ocial class refers a rough division of humans into a distribution by their reproductive value. There is a competition between the classes, as there is a competition between all living organisms – and there must be for evolution continue and the species to persist. The competition between the classes is dysgenic at the bottom and eugenic at the top. In other words, classes are the result of evolution in action. And the question of whether an action is eugenic or dysgenic provides us with complete moral decidability in the broadest possible ethical and moral questions facing mankind. There are no moral dilemmas.  There are no morally undecidable questions. It’s just anti-monotheistic, anti-democratic, anti-dysgenic to say so.

    But then, I don’t get to say nice things. My job is true things. Or isn’t that the function of philosophy?

  • Definition of Class: Reproductive Value

    (profound) (complete decidability) (objective morality)  [S]ocial class refers a rough division of humans into a distribution by their reproductive value. There is a competition between the classes, as there is a competition between all living organisms – and there must be for evolution continue and the species to persist. The competition between the classes is dysgenic at the bottom and eugenic at the top. In other words, classes are the result of evolution in action. And the question of whether an action is eugenic or dysgenic provides us with complete moral decidability in the broadest possible ethical and moral questions facing mankind. There are no moral dilemmas.  There are no morally undecidable questions. It’s just anti-monotheistic, anti-democratic, anti-dysgenic to say so.

    But then, I don’t get to say nice things. My job is true things. Or isn’t that the function of philosophy?

  • CLASS: REPRODUCTIVE VALUE Social class refers a rough division of humans into a

    CLASS: REPRODUCTIVE VALUE

    Social class refers a rough division of humans into a distribution by their reproductive value. The struggle between the classes is dysgenic at the bottom and eugenic at the top. In other words, classes are the result of evolution in action. And the question of eugenia or dysgenia provides us with decidability in the broadest possible ethical and moral questions facing mankind.

    It’s just anti-monotheistic, anti-democratic, anti-dysgenic to say so.

    But then, I don’t get to say nice things. My job is true things.

    Or isn’t that the function of philosophy?

    Source date (UTC): 2015-06-29 02:54:00 UTC