Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot intros

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack.

    We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals.

    There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon.

    It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do.

    It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses.

    If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human.

    And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency.

    And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 19:11:00 UTC

  • The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very

    The number of people alive at anyone time that can transcend the animal is very small. The number who cannot but will follow those who can if it is in their interests is large. The number who will follow those *assuming they will apply the violence to restore the production of agency via truth, sovereignty, reciprocity, and markets in everything, is far and above enough.

    We convince those that are capable of agency, we provide strategy for those who follow those with it, and provide material incentive to those neither able nor understanding, but whose interests we serve.

    And we bend the rest to our will or we end the need to.

    Mankind does not need many judges, it needs a plan, generals, and soldiers. The masses just follow the order the strong institute, and it is very hard to argue with the imposition of natural law by the ongoing suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation, by deceit, fraud, theft, and violence.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 19:00:00 UTC

  • —“You Are Wrong About Gods”–

    I’m not wrong about gods at all. The only question is whether it’s possible for not-quite-humans to function without an imaginary pack leader acting as a unit of measurement. I mean, women demonstrate NAXALT, and men demonstrate INTENTIONALITY, and by both demonstrations we can identify the not-yet-human, not yet possessing agency, and therefore not yet capable of sovereignty. Now, I know why the weak mind needs such lies. But the question is, can we train the weak mind to possess sufficient agency that it does not need these lies. It should be possible for many.

  • —“You Are Wrong About Gods”–

    I’m not wrong about gods at all. The only question is whether it’s possible for not-quite-humans to function without an imaginary pack leader acting as a unit of measurement. I mean, women demonstrate NAXALT, and men demonstrate INTENTIONALITY, and by both demonstrations we can identify the not-yet-human, not yet possessing agency, and therefore not yet capable of sovereignty. Now, I know why the weak mind needs such lies. But the question is, can we train the weak mind to possess sufficient agency that it does not need these lies. It should be possible for many.

  • Math Does Not Exist in Reality, We Invented Math to Describe Reality, Because Reality Consists of Constant Relations.

    Due to the limited number of operations available at various temperatures to various particles, and the consequential formation of patterns (symmetries, asymmetries) of constant relations at various scales (force, particle, element, molecule…) due to those limited operations, and the hierarchy of operations possible at different scales, we will easily identify certain consistencies across these scales the same way we will identify consistencies (symmetries) in mathematical fields. Math does not appear in what we study. The use of positional names, provides constant relations at scale independence, and primitive operations on positions (ratios), preserve those constant relations. Ergo, the universe consists of a limited number of fundamental rules the combinations of which at different temperatures and in different proximities produce deterministic (invariant) changes in state equilibrating frequency(energy) those differences as entropy. In other words, the universe, lacks intelligence and choice and as such is entirely deterministic (consisting of constant relations), and since positional names consist of nothing BUT constant relations we can use positional naming constructed of ratios, to produce scale independent general rules (descriptions) of those constant relations. Math is just another language made by man to describe the most trivially simple properties of an invariant choiceness universe. The ability to use math to describe the universe’s regularity is in and of itself evidence of the absence of choice in the universe and therefore evidence of the absence of any intelligence, and as such evidence of the absence of any ‘deity’. There is no evidence of anything in the universe other than random effects of deterministic changes in state producing entropy. That we can created math disproves a god.

  • Math Does Not Exist in Reality, We Invented Math to Describe Reality, Because Reality Consists of Constant Relations.

    Due to the limited number of operations available at various temperatures to various particles, and the consequential formation of patterns (symmetries, asymmetries) of constant relations at various scales (force, particle, element, molecule…) due to those limited operations, and the hierarchy of operations possible at different scales, we will easily identify certain consistencies across these scales the same way we will identify consistencies (symmetries) in mathematical fields. Math does not appear in what we study. The use of positional names, provides constant relations at scale independence, and primitive operations on positions (ratios), preserve those constant relations. Ergo, the universe consists of a limited number of fundamental rules the combinations of which at different temperatures and in different proximities produce deterministic (invariant) changes in state equilibrating frequency(energy) those differences as entropy. In other words, the universe, lacks intelligence and choice and as such is entirely deterministic (consisting of constant relations), and since positional names consist of nothing BUT constant relations we can use positional naming constructed of ratios, to produce scale independent general rules (descriptions) of those constant relations. Math is just another language made by man to describe the most trivially simple properties of an invariant choiceness universe. The ability to use math to describe the universe’s regularity is in and of itself evidence of the absence of choice in the universe and therefore evidence of the absence of any intelligence, and as such evidence of the absence of any ‘deity’. There is no evidence of anything in the universe other than random effects of deterministic changes in state producing entropy. That we can created math disproves a god.

  • There are very few of us

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack. We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals. There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon. It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do. It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses. If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human. And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency. And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

  • There are very few of us

    Look, we evolved as pack animals and those intuitions you feel but cannot introspectively analyze are intuitions that find comfort in a leader of the pack, membership in the pack, and running with the pack. We have atomized property and atomized individuals yet we are always pack(male) and herd (female) animals. There are very few of us that have had occasion to develop the mental discipline to create agency, and therefor understand these impulses as artifacts to be felt, understood, but not acted upon, just as violence, theft, or envy are to be felt, understood, but not acted upon. It’s not that I don’t understand the desire for a pack(herd) leader, membership in the pack(herd) and the feeling of running with the pack (herd). I do. It’s that like the impulse to commit other forms of crime exists in many if not all of us to some degree or another, but most of us learn not to act on those impulses. If you lack agency to do so that’s understandable, but then you lack the agency to make fully rational choices, and as lacking fully rational choices you are not fully human. And as such unfit for decisions demanding of rationality and agency. And that decision is the judgement of truth or falsehood.

  • MATH DOES NOT EXiST IN REALITY, WE INVENTED MATH TO DESCRIBE REALITY, BECAUSE RE

    MATH DOES NOT EXiST IN REALITY, WE INVENTED MATH TO DESCRIBE REALITY, BECAUSE REALITY CONSISTS OF CONSTANT RELATIONS.

    Due to the limited number of operations available at various temperatures to various particles, and the consequential formation of patterns (symmetries, asymmetries) of constant relations at various scales (force, particle, element, molecule…) due to those limited operations, and the hierarchy of operations possible at different scales, we will easily identify certain consistencies across these scales the same way we will identify consistencies (symmetries) in mathematical fields.

    Math does not appear in what we study. The use of positional names, provides constant relations at scale independence, and primitive operations on positions (ratios), preserve those constant relations.

    Ergo, the universe consists of a limited number of fundamental rules the combinations of which at different temperatures and in different proximities produce deterministic (invariant) changes in state equilibrating frequency(energy) those differences as entropy.

    In other words, the universe, lacks intelligence and choice and as such is entirely deterministic (consisting of constant relations), and since positional names consist of nothing BUT constant relations we can use positional naming constructed of ratios, to produce scale independent general rules (descriptions) of those constant relations.

    Math is just another language made by man to describe the most trivially simple properties of an invariant choiceness universe.

    The ability to use math to describe the universe’s regularity is in and of itself evidence of the absence of choice in the universe and therefore evidence of the absence of any intelligence, and as such evidence of the absence of any ‘deity’.

    There is no evidence of anything in the universe other than random effects of deterministic changes in state producing entropy.

    That we can created math disproves a god.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 10:03:00 UTC

  • There are no laws to mathematics, other than determinism. Positional names are s

    There are no laws to mathematics, other than determinism. Positional names are simply the most reductive grammar of measurement with the lowest possible error. All constant relations can be expressed in positional (constant) names. Not because of any particular magic, but because anything that is measurable between states must be deterministic. Math is a great language precisely because it’s the absolutely dumbest one possible, and as such least open to errors.

    All human progress in the sciences has required us to change our presumptions (models, premises) from intention (complexity) to entropy (parsimony), just as in economics from planning to self organization, and in sentience from the magical to the tediously boring neural. Every advance we have made only eradicates intention (design), and replaces it with self organization (entropy). And in religion from gods to deism to ’the mystery(wonder) of the universe’’s production of everything out of near randomness (self organization).

    Gods do not exist except as a system (language) of measurement, just as numbers do not exist except as a system (language) of measurement.

    Gods are useful as a system (language) of measurment (meaning a hyperbolic and conflationary) just as math is useful as a system (language) of measurement (concise and deflationary).

    The question isn’t whether these things exist (persist) independent of us (they don’t) but whether we can distinguish between these things as useful language constructs of our own design, vs existential.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-05-13 09:22:00 UTC