Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • A SPEECH: THE ARISTOCRATIC ETHICS OF DEBATE The Aristocratic Ethics of Debate: “

    A SPEECH: THE ARISTOCRATIC ETHICS OF DEBATE

    The Aristocratic Ethics of Debate:

    “The only reason not to kill you is that it is more beneficial or may be more beneficial to cooperate in the pursuit of truth, than take your property and your women, enslave you, or kill you.

    “In order to discover the truth, so that we may both benefit from it, I agree to forgo the use of my violence, so that you may debate me objectively and truthfully.

    “I warranty I shall debate only objectively and truthfully. In exchange I demand that you also warranty that you will conduct only a debate objectively, and truthfully.

    “And should you engage in deceit, or attempt to shame me, or rally opinion against me, then you violate that warranty, and I no longer shall bind my weapons, but kill you for your dishonesty, and your attempt to hide the truth from me and all men.

    “So take heed how you inform our person. How you awake our sleeping sword of war. For what follows is bloody constraint. And I warranty I shall kill you or die in the process of trying”*

    This is aristocracy.

    This is paternalism.

    This is excellence.

    This is honor.

    This is godliness.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    (*Liberties taken with the Bard.)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-22 07:14:00 UTC

  • RACE. A REPEAT. I am an aggressive supporter of kin-preference, aristocratic fam

    RACE. A REPEAT.

    I am an aggressive supporter of kin-preference, aristocratic families, paternal aristocracies, and as many of them as man can make.

    My position on the friction between the races is that democracy and multiculturalism causes conflict between them. And that nationalism, aristocracy, paternalism and local separatism improve everyone.

    My position on the cause of the *meaningful* differences between the races is the degree of suppression of the reproduction of the underclasses over long periods of time.

    My means of criticizing other groups is whether their group evolutionary strategy is objectively more or less moral than some others.

    My demand for changes is not to place it upon others, but to change our weaknesses so that we are no longer subject to the damage of the less moral, yet can reap the benefits of the more moral.

    I am very fond of my non-kin friends. I want to help them raise themselves and their families, as all aristocracy should assist other aristocracies in raising themselves and their families.

    So I don’t really want to lose those friends because you choose to criticize others successful reproductive strategies, rather than the criticize and repair your (our) own failed reproductive strategies.

    I don’t do racism. I might agree or disagree with you. But my goal is the evolution of man. I prefer every tribe evolve together, not that any tribe be subsumed by another. I want to see a world of many tribes – of many extended aristocratic families, raising their extended families. I do not seek to dominate others, only to preserve my tribe and to advance it and mankind’s tribes in the long journey to becoming gods.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-22 06:57:00 UTC

  • FIGURED IT OUT: THE METHOD OF LYING IN THE RELIGION AND PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC ERAS I

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/01/04/if-you-can-name-a-thing-you-can-kill-a-thing/I FIGURED IT OUT: THE METHOD OF LYING IN THE RELIGION AND PSEUDOSCIENTIFIC ERAS

    I think it was 2013 that I questioned whether I had to solve the problem of Truth or not. And I was pretty stressed about it. But I just felt like I couldn’t put an end to postmodern deceit unless I did so. So reluctantly I started working on it. And it took me a while. It was fairly hard. Easier thanks to the work on critical rationalism and the current state of the foundation of mathematics.

    Then, once there, I asked myself, if I could end lying. In January of this year (2015) I posted this on my web site: “If You Can Name a Thing, You Can Kill A Thing”. Meaning that things have ‘true names’ (operational names). And if you know its true name you can defeat it.

    I wasn’t sure I could solve the technique by which the monotheistic and cosmopolitan lies were constructed. But I did. And now I understand why they had to close the Stoic Schools: they make you impervious to the technique of using half truths to conduct pre-shaming, and to invoke altruistic responses as substitutes rather than skepticism.

    In other words, liars take advantage of a social cognitive bias. And through repetition convince us that a convenient lie is necessary when it is not.

    I’ve also begun to understand why western traditionalists think god is the subject of spirituality rather than an excuse to make use of spirituality for totalitarian purposes against the genetic interests of a people.

    So I know how to kill that too.

    I thought this would take me longer than a year. In a year I will have religion so deconstructed that I will match the precision of my deconstruction of morality. I will unify religion along with every other discipline.

    I am confident now. I can do it.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-22 06:45:00 UTC

  • LET ME HELP YOU: A CONSULTING FIRM IS AN INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION: A PROFESSION

    LET ME HELP YOU: A CONSULTING FIRM IS AN INTELLIGENCE ORGANIZATION: A PROFESSION OF BENEVOLENT SPYING.

    Why do you think I built so many consulting firms?

    And I was very good at it by the way – thanks. Because I am honest with myself about that business. In the most part, as an intelligence specialist, you gather information from one group inside the organization and transfer it to another group who is dis-incentivized for various compensation and status reasons to cooperate with, defer to, or obey the directions of the other group.

    In most large organizations the answer to every current problem is hosted in someone’s brain somewhere in the organization (often in the marketing department’s middle management, or in the bowels of accounting where some uncomfortable truth is protected from release).

    But the incentives to act on that knowledge – often precisely because of the individuals who host it – cannot or will not be acted upon. Otherwise, people will not act on the solution to a problem because the incentives of the organization are perverse (counter productive). Or because the individuals currently in positions of decision making would be subject to negative effects (usually middle and upper management other than the c-suite).

    So the job of a consultant is to simply get people to talk to you on one hand, and to produce a deliverable that provides a means by which the knowledge that exists in the company can be brought to fruition by some sort of reorganization of goals, processes, responsibilities, incentives and compensations. But mostly – at least a the level I tend to work – by giving people in the organization PERMISSION to change alliances and loyalty relations without breaking an alliance or loyalty.

    The mistake of most neophytes is to assume people are ignorant, stupid or stubborn, when in fact humans pretty much demonstrate rational action.

    Despite their policies against it I have, (and many agency networks have) had parallel projects in multiple cell phone providers. Each desperate to protect some strategy that is well understood by the competition – so much so that the internal ability to execute has been inhibited by this defensiveness: which I usually view as an excuse to not get work done more than defensiveness.

    At every level of the organization there is information that is either true and actionable, false and actionable, inactionable, or irrelevant. The trick is to find it. Why? Because a company and processes aren’t special or unique or interesting, or special or a competitive advantage any more than whether a culture practices tea ceremonies or dances ’round the may pole. What separates a good company from a bad is the quality of people, their ability to reorganize in response to market changes, and the quality of information they make use of, and the technological means by which they warranty that they are not privatizing the shareholder commons either by action or inaction, statement or silence, constructive suggestion or destructive rumor and gossip. They are probably obvious and the central problem of organizing production under voluntary employment, is in preserving the will of those with knowledge to make use of it.

    Basically, truth wins. Discover the truth. Provide a plan. And in that plan, find a way to preserve signals for everyone. Pay people if you must to take a hit. Don’t expect them just to take a hit for you. If you try to do things without compensating people then you’re not engaging in exchange.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-22 04:42:00 UTC

  • The Truth Content of Religions

    [N]ature worship – or the sacredness of nature – and ancestor worship, and hero worship, and stoic rituals that produce mindfulness are hard to call dishonest or untruthful. Praying for wisdom from any of the above is pretty hard to posit as anything worse than mental discipline that encourages self honesty. We cannot say the same of the offspring of babylonian totalitarian mythos. I am a big fan of confession myself. it works. I am a big fan of prayer. It works. I am a fan of mindfulness – albeit, I use writing and argument for that purpose. I am a fan of meditation, although I meditate on while listening to the recorded words of great men. I am … uncomfortable with my feeling that all our thoughts, words, and deeds are somehow influencing each other – although I am aware that it is likely just cognitive bias. What I will am not comfortable with, what I will rebel against, what I have chosen to conduct war against, is the cult of lies that originates in theology, is exacerbated under obscurantist language of rationalism, and worsened under pseudoscience and propaganda. I will protect me and mine from nature. I will protect me and mine from virus and disease. I will protect me and mine from beast. I will protect me and mine from violence, theft, fraud, conspiracy, immigration, conversion, war and conquest. And the most important means of protecting me and mine, is to punish the smallest infraction of our promise of cooperation: lying. [N]o more lies. No more american utopian lies. No more lies for the purpose of marketing advertising and selling. no more lies for accumulating political power. No more lies for entertainment purposes that we call news. No more lies from the politicians platform, no more lies from the professors’s podium, no more lies from the intellectual’s media, no more lies from the priest’s pulpit. No more lies. If you are not willing to pay the cost of forgoing your lies, you are not willing to enter into the exchange that requires others to forgo their lies. As such you are a liar, a fraud, and a thief. No more lies. It is expensive for all of us to stop lying. It is burdensome to speak the truth in matters of the commons. It is expensive to learn to speak truthfully. But it was expensive not to kill. not to steal. not to commit fraud. not to engage in entrapment (usury), not to engage in free riding, not to engage in conspiracy – and tremendously rewarding for us to be forced into engaging in production. It was expensive for us to learn literacy. It was expensive for us to learn scientistic thought. I twas expensive for us to abandon mysticism. All these institutional changes cost us heavily. Truth is the most expensive commons in the world which is why none does it. Truth prohibits parasitism. And the majority of the world has chosen to perpetuate parasitism internally, if not professionalize in parasitism externally. But the returns on truth will be as great as the returns on science. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • The Truth Content of Religions

    [N]ature worship – or the sacredness of nature – and ancestor worship, and hero worship, and stoic rituals that produce mindfulness are hard to call dishonest or untruthful. Praying for wisdom from any of the above is pretty hard to posit as anything worse than mental discipline that encourages self honesty. We cannot say the same of the offspring of babylonian totalitarian mythos. I am a big fan of confession myself. it works. I am a big fan of prayer. It works. I am a fan of mindfulness – albeit, I use writing and argument for that purpose. I am a fan of meditation, although I meditate on while listening to the recorded words of great men. I am … uncomfortable with my feeling that all our thoughts, words, and deeds are somehow influencing each other – although I am aware that it is likely just cognitive bias. What I will am not comfortable with, what I will rebel against, what I have chosen to conduct war against, is the cult of lies that originates in theology, is exacerbated under obscurantist language of rationalism, and worsened under pseudoscience and propaganda. I will protect me and mine from nature. I will protect me and mine from virus and disease. I will protect me and mine from beast. I will protect me and mine from violence, theft, fraud, conspiracy, immigration, conversion, war and conquest. And the most important means of protecting me and mine, is to punish the smallest infraction of our promise of cooperation: lying. [N]o more lies. No more american utopian lies. No more lies for the purpose of marketing advertising and selling. no more lies for accumulating political power. No more lies for entertainment purposes that we call news. No more lies from the politicians platform, no more lies from the professors’s podium, no more lies from the intellectual’s media, no more lies from the priest’s pulpit. No more lies. If you are not willing to pay the cost of forgoing your lies, you are not willing to enter into the exchange that requires others to forgo their lies. As such you are a liar, a fraud, and a thief. No more lies. It is expensive for all of us to stop lying. It is burdensome to speak the truth in matters of the commons. It is expensive to learn to speak truthfully. But it was expensive not to kill. not to steal. not to commit fraud. not to engage in entrapment (usury), not to engage in free riding, not to engage in conspiracy – and tremendously rewarding for us to be forced into engaging in production. It was expensive for us to learn literacy. It was expensive for us to learn scientistic thought. I twas expensive for us to abandon mysticism. All these institutional changes cost us heavily. Truth is the most expensive commons in the world which is why none does it. Truth prohibits parasitism. And the majority of the world has chosen to perpetuate parasitism internally, if not professionalize in parasitism externally. But the returns on truth will be as great as the returns on science. Curt Doolittle The Propertarian Institute Kiev, Ukraine.

  • WHY AREN’T THERE MORE FEMALE DIRECTORS? Top 100 films (directed by women) – a li

    WHY AREN’T THERE MORE FEMALE DIRECTORS?

    Top 100 films (directed by women) – a list by minalex

    The problem is that there is only one money making director on that list that can compete with men as a rule rather than as an outlier, and that’s KB.

    It’s not about whether you like the movie. It’s about whether people will drive, fill up the gas, get a date, drive more, park, walk, buy tickets, grab something at the snack bar, watch a movie, go for a drink or food after the movie, drive the date home, drive home. If you cant get someone to do that it’s not a movie. It’s a daydream. It’s not business its recreation.

    If you want to make it as a woman director, follow the advice we got in film school: shoot a trailer, shoot a sex scene (yeah, that’s what we were taught – it’s hard to do), shoot a car chase, shoot a horror movie that doesn’t make people laugh at you, and blow people away with how much emotion you created with how little resources. A drama doesnt take skill in managing the audience experience. Then make the case you will make money. After all. That’s the business.

    Men are more likely to trust men. Men are more likely to take risks. Men are more likely to lose health, life, family and home for their work. Men are more likely the high performing outliers. We invest in who we trust. So there is a bias toward men by men for completely logical reasons: evidence.

    What I remember hearing from women all the time was “I want to make a movie at my pace with my aesthetics, on the budget I need to do that”. Made me cringe.

    There are thousands of guys out there willing to make a movie that makes money at whatever pace the money requires. You gotta get people out onto the street and into the theatre, you’re competing with video games, and the internet, not other movies. The test is not whether one movie is better than another. Its whether people will choose to go to your movie during it’s first weekend over video games, netflix, the internet and whatever else they can choose to do.

    Enough complaining from me. Just tired of dealing with bias claims in all walks of life when the problem is trust and evidence. If women need to make movies becasue they’re women then raise money and build a studio to do it. If you can’t get into business raising your own money, than that’s just empirical. If you can’t stay in business, then that’s just empirical. Its just what it is.

    Movie making is an extreme right of the curve high risk business. It’s gambling. Some people do it for love at great personal cost, often, if not most often, experiencing tragic failure. Other people do it because they know how to make money at it. And others are willing to burn life, health, family, friends, and every cent they have to make it happen. And that inspires trust. The kind of trust you give budget to.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 15:47:00 UTC

  • The house of commons in the UK is the best training for politicians in the world

    The house of commons in the UK is the best training for politicians in the world. They really screwed up by removing the king’s veto. We really screwed up by not persuading Washington to be a king. We both screwed up by not recognizing we’d created our houses as markets for commons, not a justification of majority rule. We both screwed up by not giving the lower classes and women their own houses. We both screwed up by not improving the structure of law, rather than rapidly expanding the content of it.

    The industrial revolution just came early, and fast, and spread fast, and our old institutions were too poorly understood to adapt rapidly to the change. We failed.

    We can correct it. But to correct it will take the organized application of violence to raise the cost of the currently immoral status quo to the point where our solution is preferable to the corruption of the present one.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 14:26:00 UTC

  • THE TRUTH CONTENT OF RELIGIONS I mean, nature worship – or the sacredness of nat

    THE TRUTH CONTENT OF RELIGIONS

    I mean, nature worship – or the sacredness of nature – and ancestor worship, and hero worship, and stoic rituals that produce mindfulness are hard to call dishonest or untruthful. Praying for wisdom from any of the above is pretty hard to posit as anything worse than mental discipline that encourages self honesty.

    We cannot say the same of the offspring of babylonian totalitarian mythos. I am a big fan of confession myself. it works. I am a big fan of prayer. It works. I am a fan of mindfulness – albeit, I use writing and argument for that purpose. I am a fan of meditation, although I meditate on while listening to the recorded words of great men. I am … uncomfortable with my feeling that all our thoughts, words, and deeds are somehow influencing each other – although I am aware that it is likely just cognitive bias.

    What I will am not comfortable with, what I will rebel against, what I have chosen to conduct war against, is the cult of lies that originates in theology, is exacerbated under obscurantist language of rationalism, and worsened under pseudoscience and propaganda.

    I will protect me and mine from nature. I will protect me and mine from virus and disease. I will protect me and mine from beast. I will protect me and mine from violence, theft, fraud, conspiracy, immigration, conversion, war and conquest. And the most important means of protecting me and mine, is to punish the smallest infraction of our promise of cooperation: lying.

    no more lies. No more american utopian lies. No more lies for the purpose of marketing advertising and selling. no more lies for accumulating political power. No more lies for entertainment purposes that we call news. No more lies from the politicians platform, no more lies from the professors’s podium, no more lies from the intellectual’s media, no more lies from the priest’s pulpit. No more lies.

    If you are not willing to pay the cost of forgoing your lies, you are not willing to enter into the exchange that requires others to forgo their lies. As such you are a liar, a fraud, and a thief.

    No more lies. It is expensive for all of us to stop lying. It is burdensome to speak the truth in matters of the commons. It is expensive to learn to speak truthfully.

    But it was expensive not to kill. not to steal. not to commit fraud. not to engage in entrapment (usury), not to engage in free riding, not to engage in conspiracy – and tremendously rewarding for us to be forced into engaging in production.

    It was expensive for us to learn literacy. It was expensive for us to learn scientistic thought. I twas expensive for us to abandon mysticism. All these institutional changes cost us heavily.

    Truth is the most expensive commons in the world which is why none does it. Truth prohibits parasitism. And the majority of the world has chosen to perpetuate parasitism internally, if not professionalize in parasitism externally.

    But the returns on truth will be as great as the returns on science.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 12:41:00 UTC

  • WHY IS PROPERTARIANISM’S EXPLANATORY POWER SO IMPORTANT? Well, look at each disc

    WHY IS PROPERTARIANISM’S EXPLANATORY POWER SO IMPORTANT?

    Well, look at each discipline as a set of criticisms than any theory has to survive scrutiny.

    A unit of measure, or method of comparison, might be informative inside of a particular discipline, but meaningless across disciplines (happiness for example makes no sense in mathematics, yet at least basic mathematics makes sense in experimental psychology).

    Propertarianism not only survives criticism in each discipline but renders all disciplines commensurable – sort of how money and prices make the value of all goods commensurable.

    So one might attempt, falsely, to justify propertarianism and testimonialism as true, or one might say, that given it survives application to all these different fields, and unites these fields, survives as a truth candidate until a superior truth candidate comes along.

    Unifying Biology, Psychology, Sociology, Morality, Law, Economics and Philosophy is no small thing. It’s a very important thing.

    And yes, it’s a bit hard to learn critical rationalism, testimonialism, propertarianism, propertarian institutions, and propertarian legal construction. But it’s equally hard to learn many other disciplines.

    But all investments provide returns or not.

    The fact that propertarianism and testimonialism provide such broad explanatory power, survives application in all fields, provides commensurability across all fields, is enough, hopefully, for some of us to invest in this discipline versus some different discipline.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-11-21 12:10:00 UTC