Curt Doolittle

Form: Excerpt

  • Owen Flanagan’s Test of A Philosophical Psychology


    [A] philosophical psychology ought to answer questions such as these:

    • What, if anything, are humans like deep down inside beneath the clothes of culture?

    • What, if any, features of mind-world interaction, and thus of the human predicament, are universal?

    • Is there any end state or goal(s) that all humans seek because they are wired to seek it (or them), or what is different, ought to seek because it is—or, they are—worthy?

    • If there is a common natural orientation toward some end state(s), for example, pleasure, friendship, community, truth, beauty, goodness, intellectual contemplation, are these ends mutually consistent? If not, must one choose a single dominant end? Does our nature not only provide the end(s), but also a way of ordering and prioritizing them, as well as a preferred ratio among them that produces some sort of equilibrium?

    • How conducive is following our nature to actually producing what we naturally seek, or what is different, sensibly ought to seek? Could it be that not everything we seek—not even pleasant experiences or truth—is good for us?

    • What is the relation between our first nature, our given human nature, and our second nature, our cultured nature?

    • Does first nature continue in contemporary worlds, in new ecologies, to achieve its original ends? If so, is first nature also well suited to achieving new, culturally discovered, or what is different, created ends

    • Is second nature constructed precisely for the achievement of variable, culturally discovered or created ends that first nature is ill-equipped to achieve?

    • Do different societies construct/develop second nature in order to enhance first nature and/or to moderate and modify, possibly to eliminate, certain seeds in our first nature that can work against that very (first) nature and/or against our second nature and our cultured ends, which our second nature is intended to help us achieve?

    Errors in these questions of the city state or class:

    • The Problem Of Universalism: One Ness vs Individual, Family, tribe, race and corporation.(Doolittle) Which is reducible to a hierarchy of desires (needs). And they cannot be equally met.

    Eudemonia (Aristotle)


  • Owen Flanagan’s Test of A Philosophical Psychology


    [A] philosophical psychology ought to answer questions such as these:

    • What, if anything, are humans like deep down inside beneath the clothes of culture?

    • What, if any, features of mind-world interaction, and thus of the human predicament, are universal?

    • Is there any end state or goal(s) that all humans seek because they are wired to seek it (or them), or what is different, ought to seek because it is—or, they are—worthy?

    • If there is a common natural orientation toward some end state(s), for example, pleasure, friendship, community, truth, beauty, goodness, intellectual contemplation, are these ends mutually consistent? If not, must one choose a single dominant end? Does our nature not only provide the end(s), but also a way of ordering and prioritizing them, as well as a preferred ratio among them that produces some sort of equilibrium?

    • How conducive is following our nature to actually producing what we naturally seek, or what is different, sensibly ought to seek? Could it be that not everything we seek—not even pleasant experiences or truth—is good for us?

    • What is the relation between our first nature, our given human nature, and our second nature, our cultured nature?

    • Does first nature continue in contemporary worlds, in new ecologies, to achieve its original ends? If so, is first nature also well suited to achieving new, culturally discovered, or what is different, created ends

    • Is second nature constructed precisely for the achievement of variable, culturally discovered or created ends that first nature is ill-equipped to achieve?

    • Do different societies construct/develop second nature in order to enhance first nature and/or to moderate and modify, possibly to eliminate, certain seeds in our first nature that can work against that very (first) nature and/or against our second nature and our cultured ends, which our second nature is intended to help us achieve?

    Errors in these questions of the city state or class:

    • The Problem Of Universalism: One Ness vs Individual, Family, tribe, race and corporation.(Doolittle) Which is reducible to a hierarchy of desires (needs). And they cannot be equally met.

    Eudemonia (Aristotle)


  • ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN COVER The men with moral hearts Must be the ones who st

    ARISTOCRATIC EGALITARIAN COVER

    The men with moral hearts

    Must be the ones who start

    To mold a new reality

    To fashion a new art

    Closer to their hearts

    Philosophers and Craftsmen

    Each must do his part

    To draft a new mentality

    To teach a new morality

    Closer to their art

    Engineers and the artists

    Reflect it in their art

    To sew their creativity

    To design a new fidelity

    Closer to our hearts

    If you can be nobility;

    I will draw the charts

    A few score can change destiny.

    And forge a new reality.

    Closer to the hearts

    Closer to our arts

    To mold a new mentality

    Closer to our hearts

    To sew our creativity

    Closer to our arts.

    To forge a new reality.

    Closer to our hearts.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-07 06:20:00 UTC

  • Morals vs Property — (excerpt) Of Haidt’s evolutionary origins of moral intuiti

    — Morals vs Property —

    (excerpt)

    Of Haidt’s evolutionary origins of moral intuitions three can be expressed as individual property rights:

    1. Care/harm for others, protecting them from harm. (The asset of life and body.)

    2. Proportionality/cheating, Justice, treating others in proportion to their actions. (The asset of goods.)

    3. Liberty/Oppression, characterizes judgments in terms of whether subjects are tyrannized. (The asset of time, opportunity.)

    And three can be expressed as community property rights covering social capital, which have been and continue to be mirrored in corporate shareholder agreements.

    4. In-Group Loyalty/In-Group Betrayal to/of your group, family, nation, polity.

    5. Respect/Authority/Subversion for tradition and legitimate authority.

    6. Purity/Sanctity/Degradation/Disgust, avoiding disgusting things, foods, actions.

    It should be noted that the male reproductive strategy among chimpanzees as well as humans evolved to kill off males in opposing groups and collect females. And that females evolved to place greater emphasis on children and females than the (fungible) tribe.

    As such the distribution of moral intuitions varies in intensity between the feminine (1-3) and the masculine (4-6). This difference in moral intuitions roughly reflects the voting pattern we have seen since the enfranchisement of women into the electorate: an increase in the use of political violence to produce an increase in the female reproductive strategy (individual dysgenic reproduction) and a decrease in the male reproductive strategy (tribal eugenic reproduction).

    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-27 03:03:00 UTC

  • Broadway, USA. With his own version of “a thousand points of light,” now at play

    Broadway, USA.

    With his own version of “a thousand points of light,” now at play in the world — and mostly attributable to his high-promotional-value in-your-face POTUS bids of 88, 08 & 12 — the legacy of RP continues to manifest in so many unpredictable and often (pleasantly) surprising ways.

    Worth being a student of, considering the results.

    “One morning in 2011, Ívar woke up with the idea for the project and started working on it, setting out to make the best album of songs he possibly could, enlisting Stefán Örn Gunnlaugsson as producer and arranger. Alongside him from the start was Gunnlaugur Jónsson, executive producer and co-author of the story. In 2012, the script was nearing its final form and in 2013 they started working with producers Karl Pétur Jónsson and Óskar Eiríksson. Subsequently the ball started rolling faster. They decided to head to New York with the piece and a milestone in the process was when they hired Bergur Þór Ingólfsson as a director, bringing with him the acclaimed creative team behind the Icelandic production of Mary Poppins; choreographer Lee Proud and set designer Petr Hlousek.”

    Source date (UTC): 2014-09-07 17:05:00 UTC

  • “Go therefore, tell thy master here I am; My ransom is this frail and worthless

    –“Go therefore, tell thy master here I am;

    My ransom is this frail and worthless trunk,

    My army but a weak and sickly guard;

    Yet, God before, tell him we will come on,

    …

    The sum of all our answer is but this:

    We would not seek a battle, as we are;

    Nor, as we are, we say we will not shun it”–

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-28 08:12:00 UTC

  • “That we have immoral politics for thousands of years does not make crass politi

    —“That we have immoral politics for thousands of years does not make crass politics any less evil.”– David Macdonough.

    (Note, I just wanted to capture this response here, as a good illustration of the familial origins of morality. In this reply, I’m trying to suggest why government must be not just rational but scientific. Because, as most of you know, I have become very hostile to the pretense of reason, given the pseudoscientific attack on the west during the 20th century.)

    David,

    CASES

    A population ISLE is on a large island with Crete’s climate, plenty of sea resources, fertile volcanic soil, and they prohibit marriage until the couple can afford to buy their own home, so they practice late marriage and reproduction. This controls their population. They are all closely related so they out-breed. They conduct internal and sea trade.

    A population FOR lives in a land of forests and rivers, with a temperate climate of hot but bearable summers and cold but bearable winters, fertile soil, and they prohibit marriage until the couple can own their own home, so they practice late marriage and reproduction. Most neighboring populations practice very similar manners, ethics, morals, and traditions, and they conduct land and river trade. They are all closely related so they out breed at least locally.

    A population PEN lives on a peninsula that provides adequate but not good terrain and soil. They are surrounded on all sides by very different peoples, all of whom seek control of trade routes and taxes to fund the costs of keeping competitors at bay. They practice traditional families. Only the upper classes control their breeding. They practice non-egalitarian inheritance to keep property in the family. They breed largely with close friends and relatives.

    A Population STP lives on an steppe of horsemen with limited resources, no transportable rivers or sea lanes, harsh winters and warm short summers. All local resources are scarce so they move their herds constantly across vast areas and constantly come into competition with other similar groups. The do not control their breeding and they in-breed to keep limited portable property in the family.

    A Population DES lives on a desert of horsemen with no resources, hot days and cold nights, useless soil, and they sustain themselves by migratory herding. There are no local resources so they move their herds constantly across very fragile terrain and compete ruthlessly to obtain or hold what they have. They do not control their breeding and they in-breed almost exclusively to keep limited portable property in the family.

    While the assessment of criminal, unethical, immoral and conspiratorial conduct remains constant in all cultures, the TOLERANCE or INTOLERANCE for criminal, unethical, immoral and conspiratorial conduct varies between these groups. The degree of demonstrated morality one practices reflects the degree of outbreeding one practices.

    Cooperation is a reproductive strategy. The only rational reason for abandoning violence is that it is more rewarding to cooperate than conflict. The only reason to engage in ethical behavior is because it is more rewarding than engaging in deception with out-group members (the market) and in-group members – because they will ostracize you. The only reason to engage in moral behavior is because other members of your group will ostracize you for not. But one doesn’t care about out-group members, upon who we can impose costs at will whenever possible.

    Westerners make the mistake of confusing the universal ethics of the market, with the strategic reproductive ethics of the polity.

    No one other than westerners makes this mistake. When other civilizations complain about capitalism, it is the attack on their family structures that it represents, in no small part, they are reacting to – justifiably.

    In then end analysis, under unmitigated fully ethical, but morally neutral capitalism, over time, the most parasitic peoples that breed the fastest will conquer those that attempt to concentrate and accumulate capital.

    (See **Altruistic Punishment**. ie: suicidal tendencies.)

    I don’t make ‘should’ arguments. I make ‘is’ arguments. What we do with the world as it is, is a competitive advantage. That is why scientific arguments are a competitive advantage. A competitive advantage for the tribes and families that use them. Everything less scientific is merely a disadvantage.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-22 10:32:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-16 15:59:00 UTC

  • Family History – Colonial New Haven Connecticut. —“Abraham quickly established

    Family History – Colonial New Haven Connecticut.

    —“Abraham quickly established himself as a well-respected citizen. In 1644, although he was perhaps just twenty-five years old, he was appointed the chief executive officer of the New Haven colony. Not only did Abraham deal with issues of concern to his fellow colonists (land, trade, public defense), he also had dealings with the Indians. His participation in New Haven civic affairs was notable as well – according to one historian when an individual of that day was prominent in public affairs it was guaranteed that he was of the highest moral character and an asset to his community.

    His wife Jane died and in 1663 he married Abigail Moss, the daughter of John Moss. He and John Moss would later participate in the founding of Wallingford, Connecticut. It is believed that Abraham was the first white man to explore the land beyond the Quinnipac River. Wallingford was incorporate as a town on May 12, 1670.

    Again, Abraham plunged into the civic affairs of his town, appointed to almost every position available in the town over the next twenty years until his death in 1690 – including treasurer, surveyor of highways and selectman. In 1673 he was appointed sergeant of the “first traine band” and thereafter bore that title. On February 15, 1675 he was appointed to a committee which would found the town’s first Congregational church.

    Records indicate that Abraham served his community continuously until just before his death on August 11, 1690. His grave stone is still standing and quite interesting – a stone about four inches thick and perhaps a foot high and wide, which has his initials, age and date of death etched on it.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-08 10:41:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    Source date (UTC): 2014-08-05 09:04:00 UTC