Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • THE CHOICE OF GODS Europeans are the gods among men, and first among men. Not be

    THE CHOICE OF GODS

    Europeans are the gods among men, and first among men. Not because we are yet gods ourselves. But because we think, speak, write, work, create, and spread the evidence of God’s words, his hands, and his will in the language of god’s words, hands, and will: Mathematics (geometry), Science, and Natural Law of Sovereign Men.

    For gods must be Sovereign, Omniscient and Omnipotent. And only Sovereign men may transcend into peerage with gods.

    And that’s why European man has almost exclusively dragged mankind out of ignorance, superstition, hard labor, poverty, starvation, disease, suffering, and early death by mastery of god’s word, written in god’s hand – against other’s false gods, failed translations, and men’s lies.

    And if European man did not drag a people out of ignorance, hard labor, poverty, starvation, diseases, suffering and early death using god’s words, then those people are suffering because god punishes them for their false gods, failed translations, and men’s lies.

    And for all people, we are challenged to choose which god is the true god: an impersonal god who tests our ability to achieve sovereignty, omniscience and omniscience by learning his words, hands, and will; a god with whom we trade as allies; or a god who we obey as slaves.

    Will you transcend into gods, remain a client, or obey as slave?

    —-

    (That is about the net of it.)

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-13 11:20:00 UTC

  • THE THREE AXIS OF DEMAND FOR THE THREE FICTIONALISMS The Three Fictionalisms: Ph

    THE THREE AXIS OF DEMAND FOR THE THREE FICTIONALISMS

    The Three Fictionalisms: Physical: Magic->Pseudoscience, Verbal: Idealism->Sophistry, Imaginary: Occult->Theology

    SUPERNATURAL SUBMISSION

    1) If you need supernatural mental sedation in order to have confidence in your thoughts, words, and deeds, then I understand that uncertainty is burdensome for those with higher neuroticism (worry).

    I understand that in economic terms you are seeking to acquire mindfulness, and have little or no control over this psychological demand. Likewise I understand that some of us do not.

    The fact that fulfilling that demand can ALSO be the demand for means of dominance expression despite one’s lack of agency, is the more accusatory theory. The difference is only whether you’re insecure in the self, or insecure in dominating others. But these are the two motivations for fictionalisms.

    SUPERNATURAL DOMINANCE

    It is very hard for females to find mindfulness without sedation of social insecurity and it’s hard for males to find mindfulness without sedation of dominance insecurity.

    There are males with female cognitive bias, and females with male cognitive bias, but we can fairly readily (as in this case) determine which defense people are resorting to theology to sedate.

    PRACTICAL EXPERIENCE

    3) There is also however, a universal truth that all of us merely find comfort in the social and private rituals. For me, and for the greeks, the host of temples, the play, the jury, the senate, sport, war, and festival (markets) functioned as church (monopoly). But these people do not argue security(defense), dominance (offense), they just say the truth “it’s probably nonsense it makes me happy”.

    ( And it should be obvious that I satisfy my dominance expression in knowledge, business (wealth), and natural law – all of which are true – I don’t resort to fictionalisms. )

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-13 09:42:00 UTC

  • THE PRESUMPTIONS IN DISCOURSE AND ARGUMENT IN THE POSITIVA AND NEGATIVA TRADITIO

    THE PRESUMPTIONS IN DISCOURSE AND ARGUMENT IN THE POSITIVA AND NEGATIVA TRADITIONS

    I would rather let this conversation go forward without my interjection to let the team demonstrate their skills but to save time

    0) I use falsification. Falsification in science, evolved from falsification by contest (competition, adversarial) in european law. And falsification by adversarial competition in law is our oldest continuous political tradition after sovereignty.

    1) I do not presume people have agency, or that they have other than the minimum consciousness and self reflection and self regulation to engage in negotiation deception, parasitism and predation to minimize the costs of obtaining wants and needs by productive voluntary exchange (people only demonstrate the minimum morality necessary to act in their interests.)

    2) I do not presume that people seek truth but that people seek to justify priors, to lie, or sow social constructions for manipulation in pursuit of a discount, to engage in fraud, or to engage, or to conspire.

    3) I do not presume when I dont know the answer – I say something from the spectrum “We don’t know, I don’t know yet”, or as far as I know, or “we only know x so far”, or” we only know x so far and these possibilities are consistent with what we know so far”, or as far as I know thats false, or that can’t be true – as that is the only truthful testimony I can give.

    4) The history of all thought consists of the history of falsification of all causal claims other than realism naturalism under operationalism

    5) All alternatives, all knowledge claims that are consistent with failure of all alternatives to realism, naturalism, under operationalism, must depend on some incentive other than “we don’t know yet, but all causality will depend upon realism, naturalization under operationalism”.

    6) while we can testify to causes of real ism naturalism operationalism and empiricism including subjective testing of incentives (rational choice), we cannot possibly testify to any claim that is not dependent upon realism, naturalism, under operationalism, because we cannot claim to have that knowledge,

    7) If we can identify incentive, meaning, means motive and opportunity, for giving false testimony, by claiming the untestifiable then there is nothing else to determine – the person is lying.

    8) In other words, theology and philosophy, negotiation and chit chat (exchange of signals of safety) seek opportunity for agreement or consent by means motive and opportunity, while, mathematics, logic, science, and law seek opportunity for falsification or decidability in dispute resolution by means motive and opportunity.

    In other words, if you can’t testify to a claim you’re starting out informing, negotiating, persuading, threatening by lying. Now, in a public forum at distance without direct physical contact I can’t engage in physical punishment for lying. But as a european man, defending the informational commons, i do the best I can in by prose.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 21:16:00 UTC

  • DO PARADIGMS REALLY FALSIFY? WHAT DOES ORDER MEAN? OPERATIONALISM IN ACTION Bett

    DO PARADIGMS REALLY FALSIFY? WHAT DOES ORDER MEAN? OPERATIONALISM IN ACTION

    Better way of saying it: There is one most parsimonous paradigm (We call it science. Now I call it ‘P-grammar’). There is no value in false paradigms. There is only value in different attempts to solve a problem within the most parsimonious paradigm.

    (Note: my position is that language is a system of measurement, and the p-grammars identify the paradigm, and that operationalism constitutions the universal grammar. That would mean the universe is always reducible to classical description.)

    —“All paradigms are eventually false. :)”—Rick Paris

    That’s demonstrably false. Instead, we increasingly identify limits that cause us to increase the parsimony of our theories.

    All scientific paradigms appear increase in parsimony. Aristotle, Newton, and Einstein all evolve to greater precision. Take Humors (disease) and Phlogiston theory (chemistry), Einstein’s static universe(cosmology), or the expanding earth (plate tectonics). They were false but they were progress in the right direction.

    Conversely there are three categories that always fail to increase in parsimony:

    1) Magic -> Pseudoscience (action-physical)

    2) Idealism -> Philosophy (verbal-rational)

    3) Occult -> Theology (emotional-intuitionistic)

    So we have deflationary grammars of Law, Science, Logic, and Mathematics that all increase in parsimony.

    And we have inflationary grammars of magic(physical), idealism(verbal), and the occult(emotional) that fail all tests of parsimony.

    Of course we also have the outright deceits too.

    —“It is not false. The Universe is expanding, in that what is outside the current momentary paradigm is defined as the Unknown. There is always greater amounts of the Unknown shifting our perceived facts of what is known, as the Unknown is always greater < than the known. So,”No man steps into the same river twice.” is a metaphor for all physical experience. Paradigms are currently, and simply limited and only limited by belief. All paradigms are fictitious mental constructs. Attempting to measure the illogical, is useless and limited the human potential. Logic is very tedious and limits the strongest aspects of the human mind. Only the imagination (what is common sense) is the part of us that can penetrate the very fabric of the Unknown. The greatest of all human gifts is the imagination. It is the function behind all, and cannot be interpreted by logic alone .This is not based in an opinion, it is based in my own experience.”—Rick Paris

    —“Curt I think I can see/agree a little with Rick. By the very nature of biology, you will always have a body of diversity, not just in capacity, but also concerns. The big fallacy is mistaking diversity for equality and/or dismissability. There will always be a need for more peasants than kings… This doesn’t mean that worker bees should rule the give (all you get is drones if such happens)… At the same time, if the king doesn’t address with reciprocity the needs of the peasants, you leave a tinder wound and a jealous rage ready to eat the rich and a cultural cancer that no longer gives a shit. Homogeny is the cultural cream that will come to the surface given time and peace (consistent enforced reciprocity).”—Anne Summers

    This is a long standing debate, and it’s a matter of grammatical deficiency in our language, so we must state our meaning operationally to avoid sophistry.

    ONE

    Does existence persist independent of our perception? Yes.

    Does the universe demonstrate regularities independent of our perception? Yes.

    Do we define order as I did above as the intersection of periodicity and scale of resolution?

    Or do we define order as the regularities what we might potentially identify at various periodicities and scales?

    Or do we define order as dependent upon those periodicities and scales we can measure and reduce to analogy to experience?

    Or do we define order as dependent upon the periodicity and scale open to our perception at human scale?

    Or do we define order as those permutations of paradigms – networks of relations – that vary between humans despite relative invariance of human perception at human scale – such as the asian perception of the world as continuous motion(coherent world) or the european perception of the world as discreet objects (mechanistic world).

    TWO

    As for paradigms, this depends upon whether it is possible, when specifying both theory(search criteria), operations (measurement criteria) and limits (full accounting) whether we maintain progress toward the most parsimonious description or not. So, given human perception, human system of measurements, and human chosen time scale, when stating a theory, measurement, and limit, we appear to have successfully – at least in the ancient and modern worlds – slowly evolved greater precision and parsimony – in math, logic, and the sciences at least. And this is why it’s not clear than any of Aristotle, Newton, or Einstein are false at their levels of resolution. Instead it’s fairly obvious that we have just been increasing the precision of the general theory we call description of the regularities observable directly or instrumental in the universe. So if one’s definition is IDEAL then yes, theories are frequently falsified. But if one’s definition is testimonial then it certainly appears that we are continuously increasing precision and that the number of false theories is rapidly decreasing.

    So, when you attempt to refute my definition, description, and proposition which definition of order are you using?

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 14:01:00 UTC

  • VOTING —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it w

    VOTING

    —“Universal suffrage was a mistake…and practically everyone knew it would have a great cost, but did it anyway because it’s “right”…the cost was exactly what they predicted it would be: the quality of civilization itself.”—Mike Harvey

    From Alexander Hamilton:

    —“It is also, undeniably, certain, that no Englishman, who can be deemed a free agent in a political view, can be bound by laws, to which he has not consented, either in person, or by his representative. Or, in other words, every Englishman (exclusive of the mercantile and trading part of the nation) who possesses a freehold, to the value of forty shillings per annum, has a right to a share in the legislature, which he exercises, by giving his vote in the election of some person, he approves of, as his representative.

    “The true reason (says Blackstone) of requiring any qualification, with regard to property in voters, is to exclude such persons, as are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own. If these persons had votes, they would be tempted to dispose of them, under some undue influence, or other. This would give a great, an artful, or a wealthy man, a larger share in elections, than is consistent with general liberty. If it were probable, that every man would give his vote, freely, and without influence of any kind, then, upon the true theory and genuine principles of Liberty, every member of the community, however poor, should have a vote, in electing those delegates, to whose charge is committed the disposal of his property, his liberty and life. But since that can hardly be expected, in persons of indigent fortunes, or such as are under the immediate dominion of others, all popular states have been obliged to establish certain qualifications, whereby, some who are suspected to have no will of their own, are excluded from voting; in order, to set other individuals, whose wills may be supposed independent, more thoroughly upon a level with each other.”

    Hence it appears, that such “of the people as have no vote in the choice of representatives, and therefore, are govern’d, by laws, to which they have not consented, either by themselves or by their representatives, are only those persons, who are in so mean a situation, that they are esteemed to have no will of their own.” Every free agent, every free man, possessing a freehold of forty shillings per annum, is, by the British constitution, intitled to a vote, in the election of those who are invested with the disposal of his life, his liberty and property.”—

    Source:

    Alexander Hamilton, The Farmer Refuted, or A more impartial and comprehensive View of the Dispute between Great-Britain and the Colonies. . . . (New York, 1775), in Harold C. Syrett, ed., The Papers of Alexander Hamilton (New York: Columbia University Press, 1961-1979), 1:81-165.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-12 09:50:00 UTC

  • “Just because something is defined as chaotic does not mean that it is any less

    —-“Just because something is defined as chaotic does not mean that it is any less causal as anything that is non-chaotic. There is no such thing as chaos objectively in the material world. There just is a state of matter in the state it is. Order is an expression of value that does not exist in matter. Certainly, we would, if all atoms were clustered by their kind, conventionally define this as order. But any other configuration of matter could just as validly be defined as order if given any other subjective idea of order. That is without any objective validity at all. You cannot assign objective value to the material world inside the material. That is logically baseless.

    Grammar is nothing but subjective, objectively invalid expression if it does not have basis in the immaterial.”—Tobias Grill

    I think you think you made sense there.

    It requires memory to determine whether changes in state are preserved over time (including no change in state) by whatever interval of time we arbitrarily choose.

    order is the name we give to a successful test of preservation of changes in state over time, and determinism to the repeatability of a change in state over time.

    chaos is the name we give to the impossibility of successfully testing a preservation of change in state over some period of time at some degree of resolution.

    At the particle level the world is only deterministic within the scope of the wave function.

    Below the particle level it may only be causal density is such that a test of constant relations over time will always fail at any level below the particle level (i suspect we will discover it shortly).

    So far we decrease the level of resolution until we identify a pattern, and we increase the level of resolution until we identify the next pattern. Likewise we increase the periodicity or decrease the periodicity of the sample to identify patterns. Using those two techniques we are able to identify patterns at every scale.

    Scale is determined by the availability of steady states. So waves, particles, atoms, molecules etc constitute steady states that we can describe with vocabulary and operations (grammars).

    So while we may vary either the time or resolution of our inquiry we will discover different scales at which we discover commensurable steady states that limit the scope of further steady states.

    So to say order doesn’t exist is false because the universe is definitely deterministic, definitely produces a hierarchy of steady states, and a subsequent set of permutations that limit or enable a subsequent set of steady states.

    If you wish to say instead that the universe is just matter (or energy density) in motion and that order is the name for our discovery of constant relations in time at constant relations of scale, then you are describing the same thing from firsts, second, or third person. Nothing more.

    GRAMMAR

    Grammar in P refers to a paradigm of constant relations, a vocabulary (name (state, proptery), action(operation, property)) and the grammar (rules of continuous recursive disambiguation) necessary to construct a contract for agreement on meaning.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 15:10:00 UTC

  • WHAT DO PAGAN(ANCESTOR) AND HEATHEN (NATURE) RELIGIONS ASK OF US? The only thing

    WHAT DO PAGAN(ANCESTOR) AND HEATHEN (NATURE) RELIGIONS ASK OF US?

    The only thing heathen (nature) and pagan(archetype) religions ask of us is to acknowledge debts of our inheritance so that we pass that inheritance ‘unspent’ on to others.

    The rest is an excuse to find relaxation, comfort, entertainment and and joy with others in some activity other than running, hunting, or eating.

    What you call spiritual is the result of two biological processes.

    The first is just auto association that is constantly going on in your brain. The human part of our brain never stops, we merely regulate attention or wakefulness to increase or decrease its activity – but it’s always working even in sleep. If It is always engaged in transforming perception into a world model, predicting from that world model, focusing our attention to narrow on some prediction or other, or when not doing so, it’s in continuous rehearsal of short term memory to convert it to long term, and auto association of stimuli to find opportunities.

    Auto association is like daydreaming. It’s cheap. It’s relaxing. While thinking, reasoning, calculating, and computing with reason is expensive and hard.

    The second is the old brain constantly worrying about (calculating) social status, advantage, safety.

    So the experience we call spiritual is the ritual act of sedating the auto-association function of the brain (which is very deep in the bottom center, so that it can fucking relax, and we can feel the safety we feel resting or sleeping with the well fed pack of males (herd of females).

    Meditation can do this, ritual can do it, prayer can do it exercise can do it, dancing, singing, any group activity that doesn’t force you to calculate status and hierarchy can do it.

    That’s all it is.

    A purely mechanical process by which we manage the primitive parts of our brain that evolved prior to reason, and that we gracefully fall back upon when we don’t want to think very hard, or cannot solve a problem, or must act rapidly by instinct.

    Now how does abrahamic religion work? It creates a false debt to a false god, for false crimes, and asks for us to submit and surrender our reason aspiration and transcendence and instead to ‘stay in place’.

    So if you wish to worship your evil semitic gods, whose sole purpose is to prevent you from transcendence of man, rather than just to use Jesus as another philosopher that is fine. But for the rest of us Jesus is just another philosophy, and gods are archetypes of our ancestors, and all those archetypes serve as proxies that we can through prayer (conversation), communicate with and obtain wisdom from.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 14:51:00 UTC

  • (Pissing me off again.) Religion is the means by which we educate the intution i

    (Pissing me off again.)

    Religion is the means by which we educate the intution in the group’s social strategy, through storytelling, and ritual, in groups, where we are most open to trust and subject to suspension of disbelief. This technique works just as do feasting, singing, dancing, games, sports, marches, drills, concerts, juries, senates, fireside storytelling, and bedtime stories, and pillow talk. It trains us to feel safe with one another despite our relative anonymity, alienation, and irrelevance to the herd.

    Never, ever bring faith to court. Never ever bring faith to science. Never ever bring faith to war. Faith is for the shared hallucination produced by sharing a ritual, in which we abandon reason and experience the safety and mindfulness of running with, feasting with, celebrating with, and resting with – the pack.

    It works. It works because it does not require reason. Instead we try to develop excuses for what it is rational. These are all lies. Faith works because training us in mindfulness in a civilization so alienating by sheer numbers anonymity, and division of labor and power distance we must find some way of liberating the mind from trying to calculate a relaxed, comfortable, safe, secure, successful, method of cooperating with others by means of IMITATION (training). Just like we teach a dog to walk with us peacefully. It’s no different. We are just another mammal. And the more ‘sensitive you are’ and the more ‘threatened you are’ the more you require this mindfulness.

    Never ever ever confuse faith(wisdom) with truth(testimony). We have at least three competing priesthoods: the scientific(material-physical) and legal(social and political-intellectual), and the spiritual(personal-emotional). There can be no right to falsehood in the material or rational. And It is right to criticize christians who invade the material or political with the spiritual. It is right to criticize the law for invading the spiritual.

    Christianity was semitic religion of semitic people for a very long time before it was forced upon Rome, and the christians destroyed by intent, and by design, all knowledge, all temples, all civic life, all education, as a means of preventing the restoration of aristocracy, reason, and agency, for the same reason the french, germans, and jews have resisted the British restoration of aristocracy, reason, and agency.

    Christians imposed submission(ignorance) upon the Cult of Non Submission (agency).

    There is no difference between judaism christianity and islam, in the destruction of the ancient world, and judaism marxism, postmodernism, feminism, and denialism in the present world. It is the same technique of undermining masculine aristocratic, meritocratic, heroic, military civilization by undermining with false promise using the addiction of mindfuless and false status.

    We domesticated christianity from a sick twisted deceitful corrupt semitic attempt to destroy western civlization and keep it in subjective ignorant semitic poverty. To domesticate it took a more than thousand years, and four great wars, and millions of dead. and we have still not escaped judaism and islam.

    That there is some good in christianity is true – because there is some good in all escapist religions.

    To say that it was not the worst plague against western civlization is simply false.

    So, you want to ‘socially construct a supernatural fantasy world over which you believe you have comprehension and control’ Just like the marxists, and postmodernists want to construct a pseudoscientific fantasy world over which they believe they have comprehension and control.’

    The concept of postmodern ‘social construction’ is just the abrahamic technique stated in descriptive terms. There is no difference between stating women are equal to men, poverty is escapable in equality, and there is an omniscient and omnipotent supercreature. These are just stories for teaching children, that you have not grown out of.

    Never ever come before the court with faith. And we will not come before the faith with court.

    You have chosen childhood.

    We have chosen parenthood.

    You must be ruled.

    Do you understand yet?

    Don’t waste my time.

    Go fundamentalist if you must submit, go catholic for natural law and the pretense of reason, orthodoxy is best because it is apolitical, and strong – or join the rest of us in restoring our natural religion of aryanism, paganism, heathenism – with a nod to the nazarene’s request for love of the weak – in the love of nature, of our ancestors, of our heroes, and take on the challenge of transcending man into gods, through the continuous production of agency, through continuous competition, by continuous trial and error, in the face of ignorance and uncertainty.

    You may follow our transcendence.

    But you may not interfere with it.

    That is the purpose of the enemy.

    The gods of the european peoples ask us to join them.

    The god of abraham is the devil to keep us from it.

    That is the evidence.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 12:58:00 UTC

  • THE FUTURE IS OURS IF WE TAKE IT I started working on a commensurable language i

    THE FUTURE IS OURS IF WE TAKE IT

    I started working on a commensurable language in 92. I had understood the basic problem by 2001. I started working on the european group strategy in ’06. I started the equivalent of full time in ’09-’10 on a constitution. I started ‘going public’ in ’12. Just Eli and a few others were involved (those that promoted us I do know and appreciate). I started getting traction in ’14. You can see from the videos in ’14 that the system is pretty much outlined. Since 14 it’s been incremental improvement in precision and depth every year. I can’t remember when Bill and SN started up but that group’s been how we train people. A year and a half ago in ’18-19 we got John’s help promoting us. A year ago we launched the institute – although, given the rate of acceleration, and demand for the constitution, I’m having trouble with the volume of work. Hopefully we will grow people enough to help us with it this year. Hopefully I will finish the constitution and the big book this year (please god, help me). And hopefully we will ‘launch’ this year (please god help me some more). I dunno. I’m overloaded as usual.

    My point here is that if you follow Brandon Hayes’ feed, where he collects all our posts by topic, you will see what one guy can do if he works hard enough and long enough to produce value enough to interest others in the development of a new axis of agency.

    This is how Marx did it, and its how we’re doing the anti-Marx restoration of western civilization with a few people slowly gaining knowledge skill and momentum.

    Revolution comes.

    Renaissance Comes.

    The future is ours if we just take it.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 09:22:00 UTC

  • THE COST OF NON EUROPEAN CIVILIZATIONS TO THEMSELVES —“Do you think being a eu

    THE COST OF NON EUROPEAN CIVILIZATIONS TO THEMSELVES

    —“Do you think being a european or not can be measured by the volume of the hazards of the externalities a person causes while coercing/persuading one’s self? And how the community constantly arranges to insure the externalities and and cover the damages?”— Mea Culba

    Non european communities seek to minimize stress of adaptation through relative equality and harmony – producing relative stasis – rather than adaptive competitive excellence – producing relative evolution, and the continuous distribution of the benefits of innovation and adaptation.

    Well, that’s the inverse of saying european civilization’s realism, naturalism, operationalism, empiricism, identity, logic, rational choice, reciprocity, together that constrain our logics, sciences and laws, collected in the physical laws of nature, the natural law of man, and the laws of testimonial thought and speech, place the highest burden on our conscientiousness and reason in exchange for eliminating frictions personal interpersonal political and external, and therefore the least frictions of innovation adaptation and evolution.

    We (europeans) evolve the fastest because we minimize the personal, interpersonal, social, political, and external hazards of falsehoods, each of which seeks to avoid the cost of stress required by continuous competition, innovation, adaptation, limited to reciprocal, truthful, and productive means.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-11 07:32:00 UTC