Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • NIETZSCHE, EVOLUTION, AND TRUTH (reposted) My understanding is that Nietzsche cl

    NIETZSCHE, EVOLUTION, AND TRUTH

    (reposted)

    My understanding is that Nietzsche claimed, that by Darwin’s removing the exterior causes for the evolution of man, that what he calls ‘will to power’ was sufficient to produce man (or all similar animals) through the process of evolution.

    Now, today we might use different terminology. I use ‘acquisition’ and ‘pacification’ and eschew ‘power’ since it appears from the evidence that it’s the acquisition of a portfolio of experiences and opportunities for experience that people desire and act in favor of – chief of which is status.

    I think we might also argue that mere entropy causes our development, even if circumstances (a peaceful enough oven in which to cook advanced life) are extremely rare, the universe has many opportunities to try. So as such our will to power is merely a set of chemical responses that we evolved in order to defeat entropy.

    So in effect I agree but eschew reliance on Nietzsche’s effeminate psychologizing and german conflation, loading and framing.

    Further, since psychologizing and psychology evolved as tools of feminine gossip and critique, I avoid them. I have the courage to use truth, rather than depend upon intellectual crutches.

    Using psychological explanations is a display of feminine strategies. Which is useful for the weak. But unnecessary for the strong.

    Truth is enough. Incentives are enough. Psychologizing is merely an attempt to engage in gossip using the strategy of women who do so because they are demonstrably weaker.

    I don’t know if I want power. I want to demonstrate I am simply superior. Power just means more work to do. 😉

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 16:35:00 UTC

  • TRANSCENDENCE We transcended the limits of intuition with the invention of Reaso

    TRANSCENDENCE

    We transcended the limits of intuition with the invention of Reason in Greece.

    They pulled us back into morality.

    We transcended perception with mathematics and geometry

    They pulled us back into astrology.

    We transcended morality with Roman law.

    But the Byzantines pulled us back into mysticism.

    We transcended mysticism with British science and economics.

    But the French and Germans drew us back into rationalism

    We transcended religious language with industrial science and Darwin.

    But the cosmopolitans drew us back into pseudoscience.

    We transcended the limits of perception with relativity, macro economics, computability.

    But the postmoderns and feminists resorted to propaganda, shaming and lying.

    We transcended pseudoscience with genetics and cognitive science.

    Truth, science law are enough to transcend us from their mysticism, rationalism, pseudoscience, propaganda and outright lying.

    There are no discounts on excellence. There is no cheap trick. No cheat. No cunning. No witticism. No deceit.

    The only perfection is truth itself.

    And the only means of discovering truth is that method of laundering error bias wishful thinking and deceit from our words and thoughts and memories.

    Only gods have no fear.

    Therefore only gods can know the truth.

    The truth is not comforting

    The truth is empowering.

    It is truth that makes men gods.

    It is godliness that makes us truthful.

    Only cowards and the weak fear truth.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 08:49:00 UTC

  • WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH? ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson ) It’s no

    WHY DO YOU FEAR THE TRUTH?

    ( Cold Mirror, Asgeir Theodor, Josh Jeppson )

    It’s not that I don’t understand. Its that I have failed as yet to help you understand. And while I may continue to fail, but I will try until I am at least comfortable, that I can do no better at trying.

    ARGUMENT:

    Militia, Heroism, Sovereignty, Jury, Truthfulness, Science, Sanctity of Nature, have produced the common interest, high trust, competitive excellence, and economic velocity that made western man surpass competitors in both the ancient medieval and modern world..

    We can stack argumentative techniques by effectiveness of persuasion, largely because elites are copied by their followers, and the rest of the population is organized by those elites using law, commerce, and moral speech.

    1 – Sentimental Expression (justification of moral and reproductive biases)

    2 – Mythical analogy (justification)

    3 – Moral/Religious Argument (justification)

    4 – Rational argument (justification)

    5 – Historical analogy (justification)

    6 – Economic (correlative) argument.

    7 – Empirical (causal argument – criticism)

    8 – Existentially Descriptive (scientific and truthful argument – criticism)

    Each of these maps roughly to a difference of a half standard deviation in IQ. With the upper classes that organize society (re: Pareto – the upper 20%, led by the upper 1%) utilizing the highest means of argument and the lower classes using the lower forms of argument.

    The lower classes are DIRECTED, they are not themselves capable of leadership. So they require we USE the lower forms of argument in inciting them to ACTION, but we do not organize the upper classes by sentiment, we organize them by their means of argument – almost all of which is empirical.

    So psychology is used by ideology in order to inspire the lower classes to action. While facts are used by the upper classes to determine the means of organizing and reorganizing the lower classes through law and violence, moral speech and gossip, and material incentive.

    But upper (meaning middle, upper middle, and elites) classes merely USE the lower classes by giving them inspirations caused by incentives.

    That does not mean that the upper classes rely upon the same arguments. It means they tell narratives, myths and fantasies to the lower classes in order to inspire them.

    The problem is not in inspiring the lower classes. The problem is in developing a means by which to enact and sustain a change in the status quo.

    So those things that inspire people being to the discipline of preferences – aesthetics. They do not belong to epistemology, ethics, politics. Those are domains of TRUTH independent of our preferences. Aesthetics is the discipline in which we USE truth and psychology together to achieve PREFERRED ends.

    NET: if we eliminate by violence (law) deceitful methods, we are left with truthful methods only available to us. We can create religions but they cannot be constructed of lies. WE can create ideologies, but they cannot be falsely constructed.

    I think truth is enough. It demonstrably has been.

    REVERSAL

    Conversely, if a man is not capable of motivation to transcendence by the truth, then how is he not incapable of transcendence if he fears the truth and requires untruth?

    In other words: by stating that truth is not enough, you say you are already sub-human, and in need of dominance by your betters.

    SO I UNDERSTAND

    I understand that the lower classes need to be led by inspiration. I also understand that transcendence – to leave the subhumans behind, requires that we abandon comforting lies that exist to assuage our weaknesses.

    If truth is not enough for you, then you cannot transcend and become fully human, and in doing so, become a god.

    Instead, one is just another weak woman at the mercy of chemistry she cannot master, or an impulsive imbeclile who lives in fear of the universe.

    So you see, I see your form of arguments as weakness. Not of strength. Of cowardice, not of heroism. Not of intelligence but of animal impulse. Not of truth, but of justification for failure.

    Religions are for the majority peasantry. Cults are for the minority who are desperate. Truth is enough for aristocracy because they have the courage to confront and dominate a hostile universe that has no interest in man or his joys, but which seeks to end him. Truth is enough for ruling the peasantry. Truth is enough for transcendence. Truth is enough for aristocracy. Truth is enough for gods. Because that is what gods are: omniscient and omnipotent.

    THE END OF THE ARGUMENT

    As far as I know you cannot exit this argument except to admit that you are weak.

    If you choose to abandon your weakness, and have the courage then I welcome your advice and counsel. If you remain a coward, hiding behind germanic attempts to restate Christianity in pagan language, or to restate paganism in christian language, then I think you are not really worthy of my time and effort.

    I spend time on people to make bets. Very few bets pay. I need only a handful that do. Every other man who follows will do so out of incentives not necessarily understanding. And that is the domain of elites: rule.

    Cheers

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian institute,

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-15 07:39:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF GREATNESS IN CULTURAL PRODUCTION (worth repeating) Greatness in we

    THE ORIGIN OF GREATNESS IN CULTURAL PRODUCTION

    (worth repeating)

    Greatness in western culture was achieved through rule and wealth made possible by technology, violence and the discovery of truth used together to suppress chaos, and impose order, leaving production as the only option for survival.

    Great arts were produced as status signals. And it was possible because of significant concentration if wealth, and accumulated talent built over generations because of that demand.

    We cannot wish greatness into being. We can only create the circumstances under which we can afford to have it emerge.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-14 08:48:00 UTC

  • TRUSTWORTHINESS OF HISTORIANS? History is a discipline. That discipline can be p

    TRUSTWORTHINESS OF HISTORIANS?

    History is a discipline.

    That discipline can be pursued objectively(truthfully) or subjectively (falsely).

    As far as I know, truthfulness is the most moral and trustworthy demonstration possible.

    History tells me:

    – That Man is a predator who cooperates when it’s to his advantage and preys when it s to his advantage.

    – That cooperation under risk is an expensive and intolerable burden. And that conquest to reduce risk is rational and evident.

    – That the empowerment of competitors appears not to produce beneficial returns.

    – That conquest has lead to prosperity by the centralization of rents in exchange for the suppression of local rents and parasitism, and the consequent decline in local transaction costs.

    – That his history is one of increasing aggression.

    – That increasing aggression made cooperation more preferable.

    – That to attribute change in incentives to change in man himself is the fallacy of wishful thinking.

    – That if we act as if man has changed rather than his incentives that we will be conquered by the next higher wave of aggression.

    – And that the only means of preserving cooperation is to preserve the incentives to cooperate rather than prey upon one another. Not to construct, preserve or advocate a fallacious history or properties of man.

    So I suggest the opposite: that a man is both untrustworthy and dangerous if he advocates falsehoods even If he casts them as noble lies.

    The search for blame in history is generally not reversible. Like religion it is a self satisfying means of resenting the envy of the status quo. And that we can but learn how not to repeat past mistakes of conquest or defeat by making incentives for conquest and defeat impossible.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-14 04:00:00 UTC

  • PURPOSE IS PACIFICATION: BENDING THE UNIVERSE TO OUR WILL All knowledge is not w

    PURPOSE IS PACIFICATION: BENDING THE UNIVERSE TO OUR WILL

    All knowledge is not welcome. Ignorance is comforting. The least comforting of which is that the universe is not our friend. We defeat the universe’s struggle for entropy with every day we continue exist. To survive, it is our only function – to conquer and bend the universe to our will, for our own purpose, and in doing so make a garden of it, by pacifying that universe that cares nothing for us in the least, and works every day to eliminate us.

    The history of man is the history of pacification of the universe around him.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 06:18:00 UTC

  • FUNCTION OF PROFILES IS TO TEACH YOU ABOUT OTHERS, MORE SO THAN YOURSELF. Strang

    http://www.vox.com/2014/7/15/5881947/myers-briggs-personality-test-meaningless?utm_campaign=vox&utm_content=article%3Afixed&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebookTHE FUNCTION OF PROFILES IS TO TEACH YOU ABOUT OTHERS, MORE SO THAN YOURSELF.

    Strangely enough, the article is an exercise in criticism using pseudoscience which is kind of humorous.

    The fact is this:

    (a) MBT Is not a diagnostic tool, it is an tool for categorizing methods of interpersonal communication and collaboration. It is a tool of interpersonal understanding. It assists you in communicating with others in a common language. And it is entirely POSITIVE in construction (not clinical and critical.) People with similar behavior definitely fall into these categories and we have a LOT OF DATA showing so. We can map this data to career paths and show distributions. The problem with this test is that it is not 600 questions with lie detectors. So variations in marginal scores are large. The 16 types (boxes) are ideal types. but many people sit near the lines, rather than the center of the boxes. this is fine. People come to understand it.

    (b) Yes, big 5 is better – for a totalitarian system of thought – much like freudianism it’s for diagnosing deviations from a mean – this is a tyrannical tool of socialists and feminists for applying critique to western values. The big 5 is a DIAGNOSTIC tool used by psychologists and it’s a frame of reference for them. But then, we also understand that Rorschach tests are pseudoscientific and have no empirical basis but something like 80% of psychologists have been taught to use them.

    (c) Yes, Propertarianism is probably much better than the big 5, as a division of perception, cognition, judgement, knowledge labor and advocacy.

    (d) if you take it a number of times, you will slowly determine how to categorize your behavior according to the categories.

    (e) sixteen categories is about the limit at which it is useful to group people for the average person to use in comparisons.

    (f) It is terribly useful in training people to understand the incentives of others.

    (g) the goal is to train people to think of others as having different incentives than you do. This is the problem. And that is the purpose of these ‘tests’.

    For example, before I came up with propertarianism, I used this series instead:

    (a) dominance / submission

    (b) extroversion / introversion

    (c) patience / impulsivity

    (d) blame acceptance / blame avoidance (Which I still find very useful)

    After propertarianism I just explain things as reproductive strategies in an attempt to acquire resources of which status and cooperative alliances are as important as material goods.

    WHY IT MATTERS

    All that matters is that we train people to be other-focused. It actually doesn’t matter which framework you use.

    The reason I defend MBT is because it is easy enough for non-specialists to use, and sufficiently EXPLANATORY that

    WHAT I PREFER

    1) IQ Test

    2) Haidt’s Moral Foundations Test

    3) Your parent’s social and economic class

    4) Your ethnic, religious, cultural, origins.

    5) Propertarian explanation of your incentives.

    But those things require a lot of understanding to make use of.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 06:02:00 UTC

  • THE UTILITY OF RELIGIONS FOR MANAGING A SOCIAL ORDER. AND JURIDICALISM AS ‘RELIG

    THE UTILITY OF RELIGIONS FOR MANAGING A SOCIAL ORDER. AND JURIDICALISM AS ‘RELIGON’.

    —“Confucianism is a much more useful system for managing social order than either Islam or Christianity”— Michael Philip

    True. But the prohibition on parasitism expressed as the right to property-en-toto, expressed as ‘natural law’, the common english law, and an independent judiciary is the most useful system for managing a social order ever invented. The problem is, how do you create the trust necessary for a juridical system to function without a militia intent upon its construction?

    This is why Confucianism functioned: it was a means of reconciling the tyrannical nobility by providing a means of resisting them, as well as a means of legitimizing their claim to power if they adopted it.

    Christianity is a religion of expansionary cooperation (love). It is an exceptional religion for the development and maintenance of middle classes because trade velocity and trust are reciprocally dependent. Christianity did not seize power in Europe so much as legitimate and delegitimize rulers. If a ruler was delegitimized his lands were open for conquest by others.

    Islam is a religion of expansionary violence. It justifies that expansionary violence. It is an exceptional religion for the lower classes who cannot develop trust. It provided legitimacy to conquerors.

    Judaism is a religion that justifies non contribution to a physical commons, requires contribution to a normative commons, and encourages and parasitism of the normative and physical commons of others.

    So my work, as I understand it, is the completion of the use of the common and natural law as a prohibitionary social order, enforced by a judiciary and a militia. It is effectively a scientific ‘religion’ of law, in which truth, trust, and militial defense of the judiciary, are the necessary costs we bear for its construction.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-13 05:07:00 UTC

  • ITS ARISTOCRACY THAT’S INDISPENSABLE, NOT AMERICA –“America leads. We’re the in

    ITS ARISTOCRACY THAT’S INDISPENSABLE, NOT AMERICA

    –“America leads. We’re the indispensable nation.”– Obama

    Let me correct not only Obama, but the entire deep state:

    – Aristocracy leads because aristocrats are naturally superior at leading.

    – Christian America is all that remains of world Aristocracy.

    – Aristocracy is indispensable – not to nations, but to mankind.

    Otherwise america is just an empire like any other.

    Kill the state corporation.

    Restore the monarchy and the nobility.

    Restore exception-less, rule of law, and universal standing, under the only natural law that exists: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, free of hazard and externality of the same.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-10 06:42:00 UTC

  • Thanks to everyone who is yet again reminding me how great an intellectual leap

    Thanks to everyone who is yet again reminding me how great an intellectual leap it is to transform one’s frame of reference from justificationism and meaning: the tools of imagining, learning and hypothesizing – to criticism and truth: the tools of eliminating error, bias, wishful thinking, and deception from our thoughts and words.

    The Critical Rationalists agonize over the severity of this issue in public life. They use it as an example of how politicians deceive the populace. And while I criticize Critical Rationalists for their cognitive blindness (their half-truths), in caring only about the ability to think creatively (intellectual liberty) rather than including the consequence of their philosophy: thinking prohibitively (moral and legal constraint), we are both frustrated by this problem.

    It is hard. It is very hard to see the continuum from free association, to hypothesis to criticism, to truth candidate, to tautology. It is very hard to grasp when you are still engaged in ‘learning’, that you are largely engaged in justificationism. And, perhaps one needs a critical mass of knowledge before he can begin to see the world critically.

    But while it’s hard it’s still possible.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 16:12:00 UTC