Curt Doolittle

Form: Definition

  • (Really happy with having captured the difference between speaking honestly, spe

    (Really happy with having captured the difference between speaking honestly, speaking truthfully, and the mere concept of platonic truth. Platonic truth: the most parsimonious description that is not a tautology. Speaking truthfully: promising an epistemic warranty, that you possess the knowledge of construction(causation) and of use(correlation), necessary to make a truth claim, consisting of the minimum error, bias, imaginary content, deception that is possible for you to render with current technology. Speaking honestly: that you testify only to experiential knowledge (correlation) but not to causation, and that your testimony is free of deception, because you cannot have warrantied that your testimony is free of error, bias, and imaginary content. This is relatively important because, as I said yesterday, apriorism cannot be true, unless all all properties and contexts under such a general rule remain constant. This is very, very close to being limited to a tautologies – something I will have to work on further.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-24 15:04:00 UTC

  • THE INDIVIDUAL (PRODUCTION) AND THE FAMILY (REPRODUCTION) The individual actor m

    THE INDIVIDUAL (PRODUCTION) AND THE FAMILY (REPRODUCTION)

    The individual actor may be the unit of calculation in any question of the productive economy. However, the family is the central organization reproduction, and the economy merely serves this purpose.

    Individualism then is merely a means of allocating incentives to the parties able to act most dynamically with the least friction in the voluntary organization of production.

    However, that is **MERELY** a question of economics, not of the reproduction that individuals in the productive economy SERVE.

    As such, the family is and always will be the central unit of calculation in any SOCIETY even if in commercial and legal matters, the individual is the central unit of calculation.

    Those groups that de-emphasize family and tribe in favor of the individual will be outbreak, out competed by those that retain the family and tribe as the central unit of society.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-16 13:32:00 UTC

  • PARASITISM Given a sufficient supply of hosts, and given the hosts survive, para

    PARASITISM

    Given a sufficient supply of hosts, and given the hosts survive, parasitism (free riding) is an effective if not luxurious evolutionary strategy.

    Human on human parasitism is not the exception in history. It is the norm.

    Market competition and the resulting eugenic reproduction are the optimum prohibition on all parasitism.

    Marxists were wrong of course. The value of one’ efforts is in the organization of voluntary production. Including the construction of property rights, as well as the production of goods and services. Labor is an irrelevant commodity whose value exists only under the voluntary structure of production.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-16 10:41:00 UTC

  • objective definition of Dysgenic

    http://feedly.com/k/1p4dLYVAn objective definition of Dysgenic.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-12 15:52:00 UTC

  • Some rules of Critique: Overload: Control the conversation by volume and critici

    Some rules of Critique:

    Overload: Control the conversation by volume and criticism rather than contribution.

    Gossip: Heap undue praise on in-group members. It distracts from the real contributors, and floods the information system.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-08 16:20:00 UTC

  • Fixed definition of property: Good enough for people who live in tents. All that

    Fixed definition of property: Good enough for people who live in tents. All that is necessary to keep them living in tents.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-05 12:55:00 UTC

  • AGGRESSION VS HARM VS COST Sequence: 1 – I have no agreement with you, and there

    AGGRESSION VS HARM VS COST

    Sequence:

    1 – I have no agreement with you, and therefore no constraint.

    2 – I will not aggress against you.

    3 – I will not cause you harm.

    4 – I will not cause you to bear a cost.

    5 – I will bear costs of reciprocal insurance.

    6 – I will bear kin selection costs.

    Aggression leaves open unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial action.

    Harm leaves open the problem of relative costs – and therefore is not an objective and sufficient means of measurement.

    Costs are universally applicable independent of scale, not relative, and prohibit criminal, unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial action of all kinds.

    —–

    The fact that so many people are fooled into the fallacy of aggression as sufficient criteria for the formation of a voluntarily organized polity, is evidence of the frailty of rationalism.

    The purpose of rationalism is justification. The purpose of scientific methods is to prevent justification.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-05 04:48:00 UTC

  • vs Harm vs Cost I have no agreement with you, and therefore no constraint. I wil

    http://justification.th/Aggression vs Harm vs Cost

    I have no agreement with you, and therefore no constraint.

    I will not aggress against you.

    I will not cause you harm.

    I will not cause you to bear a cost.

    I will bear costs of reciprocal insurance.

    I will bear kin selection costs.

    Aggression leaves open unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial action.

    Harm leaves open the problem of relative costs – and therefore is not an objective and sufficient means of measurement.

    Costs are universally applicable independent of scale, not relative, and prohibit criminal, unethical, immoral, and conspiratorial action of all kinds.

    —–

    The fact that so many people are fooled into the fallacy of aggression as sufficient criteria for the formation of a voluntarily organised polity, is evidence of the frailty of rationalism.

    The purpose of rationalism is justification. The purpose of scientific methods is to prevent justification.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-04 04:15:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS A NEGATIVE EXTERNALITY? Here… A negative externality is produced by ta

    WHAT IS A NEGATIVE EXTERNALITY? Here…

    A negative externality is produced by taking an action that causes an involuntary decrease in an individual’s inventory of property-in-toto* (*’Propertarian’ property defined as that which we demonstrate to be our property by defense of it. Not private property which is a contractual expression of which disputes a community will organize to apply violence against and which not.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-29 04:59:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE? In technical terms: 1) “Dishonest Libertarians” (Rothbar

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE?

    In technical terms:

    1) “Dishonest Libertarians” (Rothbardian Libertines) allocate all property and rights to individuals, maintain that unethical and immoral thefts are legal, and grant all individuals universal standing (ability to sue).

    2) Classical liberals (“Honest libertarians”) allocate all property and rights to individuals, grant universal standing, and enforce prohibition on unethical and immoral thefts. Classical liberals also encourage construction of commons and prohibit free riding on commons.

    3) Progressives (Democratic Socialists) argue that all property belongs to the corporation (community) and is leased by corporation managers (government) to individuals temporarily for productive use for the good of the community, and that individuals may keep some of the proceeds from the production that they engage in as reward for helping the community.

    I believe that this is the most accurate distinction currently available. Although I could add detail.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-25 13:47:00 UTC