Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Abrahamism as Lying to Distract from Evolutionary Denialism

    by Martin Štěpán and Curt Doolittle [S]tephen J Gould was posing as an evolutionary biologist where in reality, he was an evolutionary denialist. Liars all: Gould, Boas, Freud, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Friedan, Derrida, Cantor-Bohr. These people are all evolutionary denialists. Every single one of them. That’s what separates them from the european intellectual tradition, and why they were wrong about everything. Why do you think they evolved at the same time as Darwin, Spencer, and Nietzsche? Why do you think you have control over the lies your telling now, or that any of these people had control over the lies they were telling? In order to prevent falsehood, we categorize lying as not trying to lie, but as not performing due diligence against lying. If you try to justify a prior – you’re lying. What science did these people do: Gould, Boas, Freud, Marx, Adorno-Fromm, Friedan, Derrida, Cantor-Bohr. The scientific method exists to stop you from a justifying a prior, a cognitive bias – or a group’s mythology. They didn’t do any science. They made it up. Abrahamism = Evolutionary Denialism. Why?

    Curt Doolittle Martin Štěpán this segue of yours sort of completes the picture as the female strategy against evolutionary reality. I mean in the end that’s what it’s all reducible to – evolutionary denialism.

    Bill Joslin the incentive towit, raising children that may or may not be evolutionarily viable i.e. compensate for thoughts of infanticide and or, protect malinvestment

  • The Full Circle of Currency

    Currency Started as Debt Tokens, and has returned to debt tokens. Under P-Constitutional reforms, the cycle will be complete.  Although more technically they are shares in the state or economy, issued in print, coin, or digital record as currency, and functioning as debt tokens.  Familiar Analogy: you go to the amusement park. You buy tokens from the park. You redeem the tokens for rides and games. The owners of rides and games redeem tickets with the park owners. The purpose in this case is to ensure the park owners get their cut (tax, fee), because the incentive to skim (clip coins) is eliminated. Reversing the familiar analogy: you buy from a merchant on credit, the state issues debt tokens (currency) to you. And you later pay the debt plus a fee using those tokens, and the state redistributes them.  The present problem is that it’s not the state (you) collecting the fees for having borrowed from yourself. Instead, the state should largely exist by finance and credit that is largely privatized against the interests of the people.

    • by Bill Joslin –
      From what I understand currency evolved for debt tracking before it was used for trade. It served as an in-group tally of debts within small communities that distributed resources and only engaged in formal trade across groups). (Greaber’s Debt)
      Oddly we’ve come full circle with currency created when debts are issued.

    -by Paul Franklin – Coinage, then, might have been an attempt to create professional armies to avoid paying them through plunder? Philanthropic. Paper money, according to Ezra Pound, was ‘philanthropic’ invention of a Chinese Emperor in a drought, issued to the starving illiterate peasants that they might buy enough of the grain they grew from the Barons who kept it, and not die. The barons redeem the paper for the promise of gold declared for their presentation before the Emperor.  

  • The Full Circle of Currency

    Currency Started as Debt Tokens, and has returned to debt tokens. Under P-Constitutional reforms, the cycle will be complete.  Although more technically they are shares in the state or economy, issued in print, coin, or digital record as currency, and functioning as debt tokens.  Familiar Analogy: you go to the amusement park. You buy tokens from the park. You redeem the tokens for rides and games. The owners of rides and games redeem tickets with the park owners. The purpose in this case is to ensure the park owners get their cut (tax, fee), because the incentive to skim (clip coins) is eliminated. Reversing the familiar analogy: you buy from a merchant on credit, the state issues debt tokens (currency) to you. And you later pay the debt plus a fee using those tokens, and the state redistributes them.  The present problem is that it’s not the state (you) collecting the fees for having borrowed from yourself. Instead, the state should largely exist by finance and credit that is largely privatized against the interests of the people.

    • by Bill Joslin –
      From what I understand currency evolved for debt tracking before it was used for trade. It served as an in-group tally of debts within small communities that distributed resources and only engaged in formal trade across groups). (Greaber’s Debt)
      Oddly we’ve come full circle with currency created when debts are issued.

    -by Paul Franklin – Coinage, then, might have been an attempt to create professional armies to avoid paying them through plunder? Philanthropic. Paper money, according to Ezra Pound, was ‘philanthropic’ invention of a Chinese Emperor in a drought, issued to the starving illiterate peasants that they might buy enough of the grain they grew from the Barons who kept it, and not die. The barons redeem the paper for the promise of gold declared for their presentation before the Emperor.  

  • Ethnocentrism, Sovereignty: Rule of Law – Its Enough.

    The Via- Positiva Small, homogenous, low power distance, polities under rule of law, and their naturally limited capacity for fiat currency inflation demonstrate the optimum mixed economies for both trade and redistribution. The optimum organization of such a polity is by Sovereignty, Rule of law of Reciprocity, an independent cult of the judiciary, a universal militia, a standing professional army of warriors, a monarchy as a judge of last resort, houses for the classes demonstrating contribution to the commons for the production of commons. And markets in everything. Ethnocentrism is the optimum group strategy because kin selection favors – or at least doesn’t resist – loyalty, high trust, commons, and redistribution. Ethno-supremacism is a necessary property of ethnocentrism. Europeans are demonstrably superior genetically, culturally, scientifically, medically, technologically, institutionally, civilizationally to all other civilizations in the ancient and modern worlds. And we are so for one reason: sovereignty. Everything in our civilization descends from it.

  • Ethnocentrism, Sovereignty: Rule of Law – Its Enough.

    The Via- Positiva Small, homogenous, low power distance, polities under rule of law, and their naturally limited capacity for fiat currency inflation demonstrate the optimum mixed economies for both trade and redistribution. The optimum organization of such a polity is by Sovereignty, Rule of law of Reciprocity, an independent cult of the judiciary, a universal militia, a standing professional army of warriors, a monarchy as a judge of last resort, houses for the classes demonstrating contribution to the commons for the production of commons. And markets in everything. Ethnocentrism is the optimum group strategy because kin selection favors – or at least doesn’t resist – loyalty, high trust, commons, and redistribution. Ethno-supremacism is a necessary property of ethnocentrism. Europeans are demonstrably superior genetically, culturally, scientifically, medically, technologically, institutionally, civilizationally to all other civilizations in the ancient and modern worlds. And we are so for one reason: sovereignty. Everything in our civilization descends from it.

  • This Conflict that Undermines Our Civilization from Within.

    [H]umans evolved at least three sets of faculties: the physical-sensory, the intuitinistic-emotional, and the rational-intellectual. And we evolved ‘grammars’ (paradigms and logics) to express the experience of those faculties. Because those different experiences require different metrics(systems of measurement) and descriptions (analogies) of expression. Scientific experience in scientific testimony, in expressions of empirical natural law (intellectual). Ordinary language for discourse for conduct of daily life (physical). And Mystical experience expressed in poetry, the development of mythical and religious structures that send one down a destination-less path into the ephemeral (intuitionistic-emotional). The question is, must they be coherent compatible and commensurable even if they are expressed in different grammars: deflationary-scientific vs inflationary-poetic. And my answer is yes. There is no reason for conflict. And it is this conflict that undermines our civlization from within.

  • This Conflict that Undermines Our Civilization from Within.

    [H]umans evolved at least three sets of faculties: the physical-sensory, the intuitinistic-emotional, and the rational-intellectual. And we evolved ‘grammars’ (paradigms and logics) to express the experience of those faculties. Because those different experiences require different metrics(systems of measurement) and descriptions (analogies) of expression. Scientific experience in scientific testimony, in expressions of empirical natural law (intellectual). Ordinary language for discourse for conduct of daily life (physical). And Mystical experience expressed in poetry, the development of mythical and religious structures that send one down a destination-less path into the ephemeral (intuitionistic-emotional). The question is, must they be coherent compatible and commensurable even if they are expressed in different grammars: deflationary-scientific vs inflationary-poetic. And my answer is yes. There is no reason for conflict. And it is this conflict that undermines our civlization from within.

  • The Revolution of the Ancient World

    THE REVOLUTION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Where are aristotle, plato, socrates, zeno, epicurus, roman law, greek mathematics, and the christian destruction of the ancient world in your narrative? The talmud, bible and koran are not an enlightenment but simply the marxism-socialism- postmodernism-feminism of the ancient world: the counter-revolution against reason.The revolution in the ancient world was reason. It was democritus’ atomism, socratic skepticism (failure), platonic idealism(failure), and the success of aristotelian reason, empiricism, proto-science, stoic and epicurean replacement of conflationary religion, and roman law and administration, creating markets for all peoples – but the semites (the equivalent of ghettos) couldn’t grasp that ‘uncontrolled vision’ and sought to restore controlled (feminine) monopoly and conflation using female methods of deceit, and the female method of undermining from within. The revolution in the modern world starts with aesthetics in italy and makes its way into the legal minds who apply it to science producing the anglo revolution (athens). The germans(spartans) reacted by doubling down on it and becoming the worlds best materialists, and the americans inherited both civilizations for a time when the french and russians instigated the third war of german containment. Weak minds need certainty. Mindfulness doesn’t.

    by Martin Štěpán: I’ve been listening to Xenophon’s memorabilia. What Socrates appears to be doing is not so much being skeptical but asking exactly the right questions to get the other to get exactly where he wants him to get. But in this, he’s teaching genuinely good values and makes people think about things they really should be thinking about. I’m not seeing the failure.

    In my understanding he invented rhetorical falsification. The scale of this innovation, in retrospect, is … it’s conceptually revolutionary. Because he is not trying to deceive. He is trying to create the habit of inquiry. His ‘failure’ was in producing a systematic work. Plato’s systematic work was a train wreck. Aristotle’s systemic work, at least from my perspective, is a reaction against plato’s. When I read aristotle and plato i get the feeling that I have when reading the Abrahamists – it makes me angry. I think Aristotle might have had a similar reaction.

    by Martin Štěpán: I remember some of the passages from the Organon that definitely read like a reaction. Plato’s Socrates in the early works is truly just skeptical and contradicts every interpretation so that at the end, nobody is certain of anything. Whereas Aristotle says we have to enumerate possible meanings (serialize?) and inquire which one applies in the context (disambiguate?). Organon ultimately must have been much more important work than all wrong scientific conclusions he came up with. (I didn’t get to Ethics yet.) And yeah, Plato turned Socrates into proto-Jesus.

  • The Revolution of the Ancient World

    THE REVOLUTION IN THE ANCIENT WORLD Where are aristotle, plato, socrates, zeno, epicurus, roman law, greek mathematics, and the christian destruction of the ancient world in your narrative? The talmud, bible and koran are not an enlightenment but simply the marxism-socialism- postmodernism-feminism of the ancient world: the counter-revolution against reason.The revolution in the ancient world was reason. It was democritus’ atomism, socratic skepticism (failure), platonic idealism(failure), and the success of aristotelian reason, empiricism, proto-science, stoic and epicurean replacement of conflationary religion, and roman law and administration, creating markets for all peoples – but the semites (the equivalent of ghettos) couldn’t grasp that ‘uncontrolled vision’ and sought to restore controlled (feminine) monopoly and conflation using female methods of deceit, and the female method of undermining from within. The revolution in the modern world starts with aesthetics in italy and makes its way into the legal minds who apply it to science producing the anglo revolution (athens). The germans(spartans) reacted by doubling down on it and becoming the worlds best materialists, and the americans inherited both civilizations for a time when the french and russians instigated the third war of german containment. Weak minds need certainty. Mindfulness doesn’t.

    by Martin Štěpán: I’ve been listening to Xenophon’s memorabilia. What Socrates appears to be doing is not so much being skeptical but asking exactly the right questions to get the other to get exactly where he wants him to get. But in this, he’s teaching genuinely good values and makes people think about things they really should be thinking about. I’m not seeing the failure.

    In my understanding he invented rhetorical falsification. The scale of this innovation, in retrospect, is … it’s conceptually revolutionary. Because he is not trying to deceive. He is trying to create the habit of inquiry. His ‘failure’ was in producing a systematic work. Plato’s systematic work was a train wreck. Aristotle’s systemic work, at least from my perspective, is a reaction against plato’s. When I read aristotle and plato i get the feeling that I have when reading the Abrahamists – it makes me angry. I think Aristotle might have had a similar reaction.

    by Martin Štěpán: I remember some of the passages from the Organon that definitely read like a reaction. Plato’s Socrates in the early works is truly just skeptical and contradicts every interpretation so that at the end, nobody is certain of anything. Whereas Aristotle says we have to enumerate possible meanings (serialize?) and inquire which one applies in the context (disambiguate?). Organon ultimately must have been much more important work than all wrong scientific conclusions he came up with. (I didn’t get to Ethics yet.) And yeah, Plato turned Socrates into proto-Jesus.

  • PREDICTION OF THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF #CORONAVIRUS (#COVID19, #WUHANVIRUS )

    PREDICTION OF THE ECONOMIC CONSEQUENCES OF #CORONAVIRUS (#COVID19, #WUHANVIRUS )

    —“Curt … this is off topic but … have you given any thought to the likely path for the Coronavirus? Been reading non-stop about this for weeks. It’s an interesting problem. No obvious answer I can see, though one could reasonbly throw darts at a chart of distributions of likely outcomes …”— Michael

    I have worked on it a little bit every day – but I’m in the same position everyone else is – it’s extremely transmissible (R2.5-3.8), and almost impossible to eradicate because of its carrier capacity (invisibility), carrier duration(weeks), and durability on surfaces, but it’s not fatal often enough or fast enough (2.3%).

    The problem with the illness is the duration – it keeps people out of the work force for at least two to three weeks, and up to six weeks or more including recovery. It requires hospital beds, medication, and ventilators (space and equipment) to keep them alive for weeks. So as ‘information’ the virus really, really difficult to quarantine. And difficult to eliminate because of that. And costly and time consuming. But it’s not that deadly.

    (Aside: Gross Horror Category: ““While a sneeze or a cough by someone infected with a “respiratory disease” can only infect others within a few meters, the virus-laden gaseous plume from an infected person having diarrhea can infect others up to 200 meters.“)

    This whole thing is rather interesting because its NOT as fatal as the Spanish flu. It’s not clear it’s even as fatal as the seasonal flu. The economic disruption we’re seeing is largely from the quarantine efforts, not from the disease itself. And I expect the drop in consumer activity as it spreads. But again, it’s just not that deadly. So, given that the death rates are low, it’s kind of questionable whether we are creating a scare, a crisis, an economic recession or depression, because of an overreaction.

    My current, and conservative. prediction is that unless we soften our efforts at containment and shut down the drama, it will cause long term interruption of economies because of its durability rather than deaths, and that it will just go on for years, dragging us down.

    So, I have a hunch that we will see a propaganda effort by the cdc and governments to say this is just going to go through the world population like any other flu, and that it’s no deadlier than any other if we take care of it. So “go about your business’, and go to the hospital if it gets bad. We are already seeing this. Look for the phrase “switch from containment to mitigation”. In other words it can’t be contained so we just have to get better at treating it.

    So, at present, its a bad case of the seasonal flu that for a minority of patients puts them in hospital care for a long time, and for an even smaller minority of patients with comorbidities it puts them at risk of mortality.

    If it continues at present rates, with present rates of expansion, at present rates of infection, it will definitely affect the world economy – which is what the markets said today.

    But at present, unless there is some dramatic increase in deaths, I expect cooler heads to eventually prevail.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-24 20:07:00 UTC