As far as I know feelings of intellectual bliss are caused by the pack response combined with obviating the labor of reason. Comfort food, comfort of home, comfort of surrendering to the will of the pack. Now, there are many kinds of feelings of bliss, as well as pleasure and joy. Some of them are clearly good – church, festival, feast, sporting event, and play. Some of them are less good because they do not require a commons to produce them and therefore require more methods of escape by the individual(communes and cults). Some of them are less good because they cause disconnection from reality(mental states). And some of them are less good because they cause physical and commons damage by consequence when escaping reality (drug use). GOOD Festivals, sporting events, theatres, Arts, literature, church, prayer/contemplation …. these are all excellent methods of non-destructive experience of the pack response. While metaphorical they are not false. They are safe means of exploring other worlds, and they obtain the consent of the commons. HARMFUL THROUGH LOSS OF OPPORTUNITY There are those things that are no longer metaphorical but false. Those things neither obtain the consent of the commons but reject it and reality. DESTRUCTIVE And there are those things that are no longer false but forced – sense-damaging, and body-damaging, and crime-producing drugs. CLOSING So, i would flip the question around and ask “What failure exists in any commons that other than outlier-individuals would seek refuge from the commons in physical, emotional, and mental escape, at the cost of socializatino, consumption, physical and mental help? How should we fix such a commons?
Form: Mini Essay
-
The Purpose of Emotions. Consequence Not Cause.
We seek emotions because we evolved those emotions for very obvious reasons: rewards. What is it that we are seeking a reward for? What change in state or preservation of state do we seek to achieve and for what reason? Emotions are only rewards and punishments. What are we rewarded and punished for by monopoly orders? Originally, and still in some parts of the world, competition was considered immoral. Why isn’t the monopoly of orders, like competition, just lagging indicator of our need to create institutions that allow us to act morally in the new order, rather than cling to what is no longer moral out of habit and intuition? BTW: I usually say it this way: we value status signals higher than every other good. Why are status signals valued higher than any other good? Why do we need confidence in our status? Why do we want status signals from others? Why would we evolve such a thing? for the same reasons every other species has means of demonstrating fitness. Except that we cooperate, so it is not just reproduction but survival that depends upon our status.
-
The Purpose of Emotions. Consequence Not Cause.
We seek emotions because we evolved those emotions for very obvious reasons: rewards. What is it that we are seeking a reward for? What change in state or preservation of state do we seek to achieve and for what reason? Emotions are only rewards and punishments. What are we rewarded and punished for by monopoly orders? Originally, and still in some parts of the world, competition was considered immoral. Why isn’t the monopoly of orders, like competition, just lagging indicator of our need to create institutions that allow us to act morally in the new order, rather than cling to what is no longer moral out of habit and intuition? BTW: I usually say it this way: we value status signals higher than every other good. Why are status signals valued higher than any other good? Why do we need confidence in our status? Why do we want status signals from others? Why would we evolve such a thing? for the same reasons every other species has means of demonstrating fitness. Except that we cooperate, so it is not just reproduction but survival that depends upon our status.
-
The Next Great Leap
( edited by William L. Benge ) THE NEXT GREAT LEAP 🙂 “The next great leap in human civilization is not technology. it’s morality and law: truth telling. It will be as great a leap as science has been.” THE BAD AND THE UGLY — BUT NOT THE GOOD “And likewise I am quite certain that just as the mystics fought reason tooth and nail, and just as the religious and theological fought empiricism tooth and nail, and just as the spiritual fought darwin tooth and nail, and those who practice theology, rationalism, and pseudoscience, and justificationary deception will fight tooth and nail.” WHY? “Because, each of these groups profits from their lies.” THERE’$ LITERALLY NO EXCU$E FOR ALL THE GREAT LIE$ THEY CONTINUE TELLING TO MI$LEAD AND BILK MANKIND “But how many fundamental truths are there? (we have estimates in the range of a few hundred to less than two thousand). Why is it that people should be lied to and not taught truth, or spoken to, but not spoken to truthfully, or speak, and not speak truthfully? Why do we have any more right to pollute the informational commons than we do the other commons of air, water, and land? Why can we cause informational harm out of ignorance, yet we are prohibited from economic and criminal harm out of ignorance or not? What was the cost of literacy? What was the cost of creating rule of law? What was the cost of western high trust?” TOLERANCE FOR LIES IS COMPLICITY, FRAUD “Tolerance is an excuse to conflate convenience (cost) with conviction, in exhcange for false status signals, fraudueltly obtained, by the pretense of charity versus the evasion of the tax necessary for the preservation of a high-trust society and its benefits. The tolerant so to speak are just engaged in fraud and nothing more.” -
The Next Great Leap
( edited by William L. Benge ) THE NEXT GREAT LEAP 🙂 “The next great leap in human civilization is not technology. it’s morality and law: truth telling. It will be as great a leap as science has been.” THE BAD AND THE UGLY — BUT NOT THE GOOD “And likewise I am quite certain that just as the mystics fought reason tooth and nail, and just as the religious and theological fought empiricism tooth and nail, and just as the spiritual fought darwin tooth and nail, and those who practice theology, rationalism, and pseudoscience, and justificationary deception will fight tooth and nail.” WHY? “Because, each of these groups profits from their lies.” THERE’$ LITERALLY NO EXCU$E FOR ALL THE GREAT LIE$ THEY CONTINUE TELLING TO MI$LEAD AND BILK MANKIND “But how many fundamental truths are there? (we have estimates in the range of a few hundred to less than two thousand). Why is it that people should be lied to and not taught truth, or spoken to, but not spoken to truthfully, or speak, and not speak truthfully? Why do we have any more right to pollute the informational commons than we do the other commons of air, water, and land? Why can we cause informational harm out of ignorance, yet we are prohibited from economic and criminal harm out of ignorance or not? What was the cost of literacy? What was the cost of creating rule of law? What was the cost of western high trust?” TOLERANCE FOR LIES IS COMPLICITY, FRAUD “Tolerance is an excuse to conflate convenience (cost) with conviction, in exhcange for false status signals, fraudueltly obtained, by the pretense of charity versus the evasion of the tax necessary for the preservation of a high-trust society and its benefits. The tolerant so to speak are just engaged in fraud and nothing more.” -
The Law Of Nature Is The Law Of God.
It is far harder to give moral men a license to kill than to avoid killing. But once possessed of that license and in the absence of fear of retaliation by his peers, and with the opportunity of accolades and status from his peers, the moral man is an unstoppable warrior. I have been endeavoring to provide moral men with moral license to kill, destroy, harm, and if necessary, subjugate, and even enslave, those who would break god’s law: natural law, and speak other than god’s language ‘natural truth’, and govern by other than god’s rule: rule of law. Are many gods. Just as there are many suns in the universe. But there is but one set of laws that the universe and we within it operate by. These laws constitute ‘the truth’, and they are the word of the one, and final god, beyond which no other god may transgress. Your minor gods will not help you when moral men, with gods language, gods laws, punish you and your gods, for transgressions. Curt Doolittle The Law of Nature The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute
-
The Law Of Nature Is The Law Of God.
It is far harder to give moral men a license to kill than to avoid killing. But once possessed of that license and in the absence of fear of retaliation by his peers, and with the opportunity of accolades and status from his peers, the moral man is an unstoppable warrior. I have been endeavoring to provide moral men with moral license to kill, destroy, harm, and if necessary, subjugate, and even enslave, those who would break god’s law: natural law, and speak other than god’s language ‘natural truth’, and govern by other than god’s rule: rule of law. Are many gods. Just as there are many suns in the universe. But there is but one set of laws that the universe and we within it operate by. These laws constitute ‘the truth’, and they are the word of the one, and final god, beyond which no other god may transgress. Your minor gods will not help you when moral men, with gods language, gods laws, punish you and your gods, for transgressions. Curt Doolittle The Law of Nature The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute
-
Western Truth Vs The Lie Of Social Construction
Aug 22, 2016 9:36am (important piece) (synthesizing) (readable) —“Constructionism involves the creation of a product to show learning. It is believed by constructivists that representations of physical and biological reality, including race, sexuality, and gender, as well as tables, chairs and atoms are socially constructed. Kant, Garns, and Marx were among the first to suggest such an ambitious expansion of the power of ideas to inform the material realities of people’s lives.”— 1) To act successfully one must act correspondingly (truth). 2) We discover correspondence: Personally, Socially, Contractually, Legally, Scientifically, Aesthetically. 3) We can VALUE those discoveries more, or less, as they assist or impede our group evolutionary strategy. 4) We can construct norms (including myths, and falsehoods) to convey those values(truth or falsehood) we attach to our discoveries. 5) But we will pay the cost of any values that we attach to discoveries, Race, sexuality, gender, chairs, tables, and atoms may or may not be socially discovered. They are absolutely socially valued. But they correspond to reality. Because reality does not care about our values. And those that value falsely pay the cost, and those that value truthfully, reap the reward. Truth determines velocity of everything in a culture. Not only the economy, and therefore our wealth, but the velocity of our evolution, and even our ability to survive in competition with other societies. The best way to harm a people is to teach them to value a falsehood. You poison the mind, which poisons other minds. You leave the body alive, but kill the civilization. The only reason social construction is available is because a new technology for information distribution has become available, and the discovery of a means of correcting the falsehood faster than it spreads is impossible. Whether it be the oral tradition and travel in prehistory, writing and pulpit and roads in the ancient world, or printing and shipping in the modern, or media and propaganda in the present, the cost of deception is always higher than the cost of falsehood. Ergo we must develop institutions that correct falsehoods over time, and bear the intertemporal cost of the damage done by those falsehoods. Thankfully the west has the most responsive technology for defeating lies and deceits and propaganda: natural, judge-discovered, common law, with universal standing and universal application. The first successful suit creates the prohibition against falsehoods (frauds). We merely must defend the informational commons by requiring a warranty of due diligence against informational harm, as we do with every other kind of harm. What prevented us from institutionalizing the requirement for truthful speech in the commons was a failure to understand how to test for truthfulness. Now that we have this test, we can enforce an involuntary warranty of due diligence against any speech placed into the commons. And while it may take some skill to test, just as grammar and meaning take some skill to test, and while it may take some greater explanation to employ these tests, they are not altogether that difficult if we restore grammar, logic, and rhetoric, and merely add operational language (e-prime) to that list. If we can teach mathematics which is not intuitive, we can teach grammar, logic, rhetoric, and operational language, which is. These are the two languages with which we describe the world: the mathematical for the inanimate non-sentient and physical, and the operational for the animate, sentient, and intellectual. The tests of due diligence for the warranty of truthfulness are: 1 – categorical consistency (identity and non-conflation)2 – internal consistency (logical and non-contradictory)3 – external consistency (external correspondence)4 – operational consistency ( existential possibility)5 – moral consistency ( voluntary possibility )6 – scope consistency (limits, full accounting, and parsimony) If we test any utterance against these six criteria, then it is almost impossible to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience, and deceit, without intentionally engaging in deceit. And just as reason in the ancient world’s greek civilization raised man out of ignorance, and British science in the modern world rescued us from mysticism, poverty and disease, truthfulness in the present world will have as great an effect on mankind – both disruptively, and beneficially. We are the men of the west. Truth is both our most powerful weapon in defeat of the dark forces of time, ignorance, and deceit, and our most powerful technology of Transcendence. With truth we shall become the gods we seek. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute
-
Western Truth Vs The Lie Of Social Construction
Aug 22, 2016 9:36am (important piece) (synthesizing) (readable) —“Constructionism involves the creation of a product to show learning. It is believed by constructivists that representations of physical and biological reality, including race, sexuality, and gender, as well as tables, chairs and atoms are socially constructed. Kant, Garns, and Marx were among the first to suggest such an ambitious expansion of the power of ideas to inform the material realities of people’s lives.”— 1) To act successfully one must act correspondingly (truth). 2) We discover correspondence: Personally, Socially, Contractually, Legally, Scientifically, Aesthetically. 3) We can VALUE those discoveries more, or less, as they assist or impede our group evolutionary strategy. 4) We can construct norms (including myths, and falsehoods) to convey those values(truth or falsehood) we attach to our discoveries. 5) But we will pay the cost of any values that we attach to discoveries, Race, sexuality, gender, chairs, tables, and atoms may or may not be socially discovered. They are absolutely socially valued. But they correspond to reality. Because reality does not care about our values. And those that value falsely pay the cost, and those that value truthfully, reap the reward. Truth determines velocity of everything in a culture. Not only the economy, and therefore our wealth, but the velocity of our evolution, and even our ability to survive in competition with other societies. The best way to harm a people is to teach them to value a falsehood. You poison the mind, which poisons other minds. You leave the body alive, but kill the civilization. The only reason social construction is available is because a new technology for information distribution has become available, and the discovery of a means of correcting the falsehood faster than it spreads is impossible. Whether it be the oral tradition and travel in prehistory, writing and pulpit and roads in the ancient world, or printing and shipping in the modern, or media and propaganda in the present, the cost of deception is always higher than the cost of falsehood. Ergo we must develop institutions that correct falsehoods over time, and bear the intertemporal cost of the damage done by those falsehoods. Thankfully the west has the most responsive technology for defeating lies and deceits and propaganda: natural, judge-discovered, common law, with universal standing and universal application. The first successful suit creates the prohibition against falsehoods (frauds). We merely must defend the informational commons by requiring a warranty of due diligence against informational harm, as we do with every other kind of harm. What prevented us from institutionalizing the requirement for truthful speech in the commons was a failure to understand how to test for truthfulness. Now that we have this test, we can enforce an involuntary warranty of due diligence against any speech placed into the commons. And while it may take some skill to test, just as grammar and meaning take some skill to test, and while it may take some greater explanation to employ these tests, they are not altogether that difficult if we restore grammar, logic, and rhetoric, and merely add operational language (e-prime) to that list. If we can teach mathematics which is not intuitive, we can teach grammar, logic, rhetoric, and operational language, which is. These are the two languages with which we describe the world: the mathematical for the inanimate non-sentient and physical, and the operational for the animate, sentient, and intellectual. The tests of due diligence for the warranty of truthfulness are: 1 – categorical consistency (identity and non-conflation)2 – internal consistency (logical and non-contradictory)3 – external consistency (external correspondence)4 – operational consistency ( existential possibility)5 – moral consistency ( voluntary possibility )6 – scope consistency (limits, full accounting, and parsimony) If we test any utterance against these six criteria, then it is almost impossible to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, overloading, pseudoscience, and deceit, without intentionally engaging in deceit. And just as reason in the ancient world’s greek civilization raised man out of ignorance, and British science in the modern world rescued us from mysticism, poverty and disease, truthfulness in the present world will have as great an effect on mankind – both disruptively, and beneficially. We are the men of the west. Truth is both our most powerful weapon in defeat of the dark forces of time, ignorance, and deceit, and our most powerful technology of Transcendence. With truth we shall become the gods we seek. Curt Doolittle The Philosophy of Aristocracy The Propertarian Institute
-
Yes. We Domesticated Ourselves. We’re Just Another Animal.
IT”S NOT LIKE I”M GONNA WIN A POPULARITY CONTEST FOR THIS LITTLE BIT OF TRUTH. You know, it’s not like if I walk around telling people ‘Well, we learned how to herd females, and domesticate one another so that we could cooperate more effectively, and that there isn’t any difference between now and then other than the complexity of the methods we use because rather than just genders and alphas we have entire classes and generations. We didn’t have to invent domestication of other animals. We’re the first animals we domesticated.
So (a) that all our cognitive differences are just a division of perception (b) our differences in perception and value are just reflections of reproductive strategy (c) we herded women and had to, and domesticated ourselves then the rest of the world (d) the only question is whether we continue domestication (eugenics) or we revert to animals (dysgenics). The west invented the most profitable and fastest way of domesticating human beings: markets in everything (empirical civilization – meaning meritocracy), and cull the herd with winters, starvation, pestilence, war, and aggressive hanging of malcontents. Yeah. Well, you know the optimum is a market society where we just limit the unproductive to one child. Eventually, this takes care of itself. And I think that’s the compromise that’s just as … necessary… as the institution of monogamous marriage, and rule of law. No one wants to be forced into marriage no one wants to be forced to limit herself to a single child, no one wants to be forced to contribute to the maintenance of defense, and no one wants to be prosecuted by the law for the imposition of costs upon others. It’s not a matter of want. Sigh.