Curt Doolittle

Form: Mini Essay

  • The Spectrum of Criteria of Individual Fulfillment from the Possession of Works

    The Spectrum of Criteria of Individual Fulfillment from the Possession of Works of Art and Craft
    There are four dimensions of owning art relevant to this question: first is the experience of the beauty as decorating one’s environment; second is owning and apperciating the one-ness of the hand of man and his little insights and imperfections – love of the character of the artist; the third is possession of a scarcity that is a direct capture and personal association with an individual time, culture, civilization, and theme; fourth is the status with possessing that exclusivity as self validation of one’s achievements.

    Myself, I do not need external validation, nor do I want responsibilty for the safeguard of a cultural relic. So if I can have an accurate copy of any piece of art that’s good enough for me. Though while architecture is reproducible, scuplture is reproducible, and prints are reproducible, pottery is reproducible, and plays are reproducible, it remains quite another thing to duplicate the complexity of a painting consisting of layers of semi-transparent color through which light passes and reflects, and the brushstrokes that compose them producing the texture of the painting at close observation. Though in that sense I’m sure our technology will get there, and I can finally have my Rothko in the living room. 😉

    I do find pleasure like anyone else in owning little pieces of pottery that connect me with previous millennia tho, because it makes time and space ‘real’ and tangible.

    Reply addressees: @LinusEkenstam

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-11 16:53:21 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1690043738926579712

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689585394780708869

  • THE HORROR OF BEING GENZ AND THE CONSEQUENCES. It’s one thing to be black-pilled

    THE HORROR OF BEING GENZ AND THE CONSEQUENCES.
    It’s one thing to be black-pilled by normies and the disenfranchised – you can ignore it as spilled milk. It’s another to be depressingly black-pilled by your intellectual peers. I am so glad I’m not suffering like Generation Z. Seriously. They were sold a future of platitudes that doesn’t and can’t exist. Meanwhile, the rising tide of social media-induced mental illness, ineffective education, crushing debt expansion, rapidly declining economic opportunity, and the destruction of sexual relations and the marital and reproductive marketplace, and the end of the family, causing a society dominated by an emerging generation whose identity is determined by whatever form of therapy they sedate themselves with, and teetering on “irreversible permanent self-harm”, leading to population collapse followed by economic and political collapse, being fed by the one resource that guarantees revolutionary violence: single, angry, frustrated young men, with the obvious ‘correction’ that will result will be far worse than the pain of any substantive reform beforehand.

    ( @whatifalthist )

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-11 00:19:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689793668666781696

  • THE HORROR OF BEING GENZ AND THE CONSEQUENCES. It’s one thing to be black-pilled

    THE HORROR OF BEING GENZ AND THE CONSEQUENCES.
    It’s one thing to be black-pilled by normies and the disenfranchised – you can ignore it as spilled milk. It’s another to be depressingly black-pilled by your intellectual peers. I am so glad I’m not suffering like Generation Z.…

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-11 00:19:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689792049313161216

  • There are two branches of philosophy, literary(platonic), and natural(aristoteli

    There are two branches of philosophy, literary(platonic), and natural(aristotelian). Natural philosophy evolved into empiricism and science. Even the continental vs analytic divide still follows this demarcation. Why? west germanic is a practical military culture of farmers, and English is a legal, commercial, and scientific language of administration of scale reinforced by the Normans and the sequence of revolutions in innovation that followed the restoration of the classics (aristotle) to Europe as intellectuals fled the fundamentalist shift in Islamic countries. The english invented the modern state, and rolled the church into the state, creating a pervasive culture of empirical administration. The french were the most backward and corrupt government in Europe, most in league with the church and ever desirous of transferring the power of papacy and rome to France. With the english revolution in empiricism, france rebelled against it and sought something closer to church rule to enforce conformity with state socialism. The germans sought to replace the independence of the individual interpretation of the bible under protestantism with a new form of reason(kant). the jews( Mendelsohn) reformed their laws somewhat to be rational rather than supernatural. Then abandoned them in favor of marxism and socialism. The russians ever desirous of mirroring french authoritarianism, and much more mystical and superstitious as a people, favored literature of suffering instead of moral rationalsm of the germans, the optimistic moralism of the french, and the procedural morals of the English. Everyone resists modernity invented by the English because everyone was less developed at the time it was invented by the English – and all civilizations double down on their priors.

    Just as you, wish to double down on yours. 😉

    There is nothing left in philosophy that is not better done by science – albeit it requires more knowledge.

    Reply addressees: @univcompass

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-10 18:49:40 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689710622357766144

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689699323343163392

  • “Q: ARE YOU DOING PHILOSOPHY? NO. NOT REALLY.” Argh. Technically what I do is no

    “Q: ARE YOU DOING PHILOSOPHY? NO. NOT REALLY.”

    Argh. Technically what I do is not philosophy but formal science. Formal science is one of the four sciences: formal(logic), physical(before), behavioral(during), and evolutionary(after).

    I consider myself an anti-philosophy scientist. However, not only does no one understand the definition of science, but no one understands the distinction between science and philosophy. So for the sake of simplicity, I say I’m a philosopher and social scientist specializing in epistemology(knowledge), decidability(truth), law(conflict), and economics(cooperation).

    So, I work in the logic of decidability. The Formal logic of decidability. It’s a Formal operational logic. That means it’s different from formal set logic. Formal set logic uses symbols for categories. Operational logic uses names of operations instead of symbols. Both are formal in that they require unambiguous grammars of continuous recursive disambiguation. It’s the difference between abstract mathematics independent of context and scale and concrete and discrete computation dependent upon context and scale: a vast difference.

    The simple version is that I (we at NLI) write what looks like English, reads like programming, describes a supply-demand curve, and is just a different category of mathematics (ordinal or semantic, or ‘dictionary’) – terms that require explaining:
    cardinal(quantitative order) >
    … ordinal(qualitative order) >
    … … semantic (domain, dictionary, list order).

    I realize that I am, we are, trying to cause a rather grand leap in human thought, as large as the leap from theology to philosophy, or philosophy to science.

    So it’s quite an adaptation of ‘frame’ we’re asking of people – even if the benefits of doing so are as great as every other leap.

    The problem has been finding a means of simplifying it such that we can teach it effectively to larger numbers of people – which we think we’re able to do now.

    But like any formal discipline (STEM Knowledge) it’s more work than you’d expect. Partly because learning something you don’t know is easier than re-learning something you already think you know.

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-10 18:24:27 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1689704275033706496

  • FIXING MARRIAGE – AND NAXALT VS DISTRIBUTIONS There is a common cognitive bias c

    FIXING MARRIAGE – AND NAXALT VS DISTRIBUTIONS
    There is a common cognitive bias called NAXALT, predominant among women, but still present in some men, to fail to comprehend descriptions of the probability of a bell curve, by overweighting the outliers in a distribution. The reason? There is a deep and inescapable tendency of the feminine mind to seek magical thinking rather than self regulation, and the subjugation of impluse intuition and emotion to deliberate reason.

    Now, it’s almost impossible to know if you are going to be part of the nearly sixty percent of marriages that fail, and the additional ten to twenty percent that fail but do not divorce, in the hope that you might be part of the twenty percent that do not fail and do not end in divorce.

    The point being that the legal interference in marriage and mating has been catastrophic, and destroyed the institution – an institution whose original purpose was 1) to prevent retaliation cycles since men will kill over mates more so than for any other reason; 2) to protect the community from single motherhood and externalization of costs, or burden of the return of the mother and her offspring to her parents, by the community guarranteeing non-interference and punishment for interference; 3) third to maintain capital (property, assets, livestock) within the family and inheritance for it’s collective survival over time.

    So the point is that (a) we could follow Quebec and essentially abandon marriage. It works just fine. (b) We could restore marriage as an institution with the defenses and punishments. (c) We could create a three tiered market of 1) unattached cohabitation, 2) voluntary contractual partnerships consisting of reciprocal power of attorney and a required prenup that stated the division of assets upon termination of that power, and 3) restore the institution of marriage as one which parties internal to and external to the marriage are liable for interference in that marriage. And otherwise end all common property, alimony and child support.
    That would provide a set of options that reflect the incentives of the age of women’s economic and reproductive independence where single motherhood is not only common but the emergent norm.
    The solution to the marriage question is rather obvious. We could enact it with one legislative use of the pen. What I expect would happen is that couples would start with contractual partnerships

    Reply addressees: @RobOU812Rob @aldafa_ir @JaredAberach

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-08 14:25:16 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688919307865243649

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688899747795308550

  • The USA is a federation. This federation insures the sovereignty of other federa

    The USA is a federation.

    This federation insures the sovereignty of other federations and nation-states and insures free trade for the benefit of all. In other words, the USA prohibits empires. (This isn’t obvious, but that’s effectively what the USA does: end the age of empires and force the age of nation-states.)

    The difference between a federation and an empire lies in the distribution of power. In a federation, power is shared between the central government and the states, with the states retaining some degree of sovereignty. In an empire, power is centralized, and the ruling nation or group has control over the conquered territories.

    Federation:

    … 1. Sovereignty: A federation is a union of partially self-governing states or regions under a central (federal) government. The individual states retain sovereignty over certain matters, while the federal government has authority over common interests (like defense, foreign policy, etc.).

    … 2. Constitution: Federations are typically governed by a constitution that outlines the division of powers between the federal and state governments. Changes to this constitution usually require the agreement of a significant proportion of the states.

    … 3. Representation: In a federation, the states or regions usually have representation in the central government, often through a bicameral legislature.

    … 4. Voluntary Union: The formation of a federation is typically voluntary, based on mutual agreement between the states.

    Empire:

    … 1. Centralized Power: An empire is a group of nations or peoples ruled over by an emperor, empress, or other powerful sovereign or government. Power is typically centralized, and the ruling nation or group often imposes its laws, norms, and language on the conquered areas.

    … 2. Acquisition of Territory: Empires are often formed through conquest, with the ruling nation expanding its territory by force.

    … 3. Hierarchy: There is often a clear hierarchy in an empire, with the ruling nation or group at the top and the conquered peoples or nations subordinate to them.

    … 4. Diversity: Empires often encompass a diverse range of peoples, cultures, and languages.

    Reply addressees: @FernandoGLV1212 @NeverDrumpfEver

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-07 20:56:12 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688655303741460480

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688636503637807104

  • (The europeans could have easily repeated the conquest of the middle east by the

    (The europeans could have easily repeated the conquest of the middle east by the greeks and romans with the crusades but had no reason; they did with the age of sail and ending of overland trade; they did so with WW1, and could do so today with ease. The problem is that without need for flood river agriculture, or the silk road, or oil there is no value to the middle east, and low iq, low trust people are incompatible with eastern and western civilizations.
    The only reason for the expansion of islam by force was the exhaustion of the two indo european civs of europe and persia bt fighting each other. Every ethicity that conquered under islam was subsequently defeated by the nest wave of barbarians the most recent the Turkics. Even the golden age was persian, and that was reversed by 1000 by conversion to fundamentalism.
    Despite recovering from the indo european conquest of the world resulting in the bronze age collapse after 1200bc every civ other than the west managed to stagnate or decline by 800ad having exhausted the agrarian revolution. Yet if not for overextension, plague and wars of migration, ther is no reason why rome didnt invent the industrial revolution before 800ad. They had the technologies. But without the english problem of needing pumps to drain mines
    Explaining why the west recovered from semitic superstition and others didnt, and why every other civ stagnated before and after the brone age collapse, is the answer to social science: It only matters who innovates adapts fastest. Islam justifies and manufactures ignorance. and worse, irresponsibility for self regulation, and especially evasion of truth before face.)

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-07 13:20:31 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688540628211097600

  • One can seek decidabiity in the laws of the universe or one can anthropomorphize

    One can seek decidabiity in the laws of the universe or one can anthropomorphize those laws into divinities. The convenience of a divinity is that it is most comprehensible to humans by requiring the least knowledge – and it can diverge from the laws of the universe to suit the interests of the prophets at the expense of others.
    East asia was and in many ways remains comparatively atheist – and they consistently ridicule us for our ‘silly superstitions’.
    To say religion is necessary for indoctrination into a system of weights and measure such that there is relative uniformity sufficient to suppress potential conflict (ethical and moral diversity) is true just as money and accounting are necessary for the formation of large scale markets, and mathematics is necessary for engineering scale architecture.
    Man evolved cooperation, division of labor, reciprocity and altruistic punishment in the absencse of any superstition, while preserving selfishness, cheating, parasitism, and predation. The benefit of doing so is the adaptive range of man to either cooperate or survive stresses is preserved in the genome.
    We do not need religion for morality because morality is always and everywhere merely sovereignty and reciprocity – non aggression. However, the conditions necessary to survive scarcity vs the degree of sovereignty and reciprocity necessary to survive by cooperation to defeat that scarcity, cause us to incrementally increase the precision of morality becuase morality is simply advantagous in cooperative velocity and therefore productivity and therefore competitive survial against both nature and man.
    We need RITUAL INDOCTRINATION (of which recitation of myths during feast festival oath and burial are the cheapest form) to produce the protocol of reciprocal cooperation in the context of our environment using our group evolutionary strategy. This indoctrination provides mindfulness (the suppression of neuroticism) as our relative insurance by the group we depend upon for survival produces alienation given our relative irrelevance as the scale of cooperation and trade increases.
    Sorry for the theists, but as Augustine Aquinas Smith Hume Blackstone Darwin Menger and the rest of the economists explained, ‘natural law’ is observable, and that law is just sovereignty and reciprocity limiting us to voluntary cooperation in all possible contexts – contexts we call markets, and markets for association, cooperation, production, reproduction, commons, polities, and war.

    Cheers
    Curt Doolittle
    The Natural Law Institute
    The Science of Cooperation

    Reply addressees: @Uncommonsince76 @SethDillon

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-07 12:26:54 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688527132765343745

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1688355811678982144

  • (IMO Nietzsche’s criticisms are correct, his primary insight in his first book i

    (IMO Nietzsche’s criticisms are correct, his primary insight in his first book is the need for our western restoration. But few people understand him thoroughly because they’re looking for what isn’t there. Nietzche didn’t solve the problem he set out to. He didn’t. He couldn’t. He could only tell us what it might feel like if we did. I would argue we are still trying to complete the 19th-century Darwinian revolution and the classical restoration, but the Marxists have been selling snake oil precisely because all the past thinkers never succeeded sufficiently to counter them.
    Now, IMO (and I don’t know anyone who understands this better than I do) the information was sitting under our noses – it just wasn’t in philosophical or theological form, and unfortunately, there is a deep need for supernatural or ideal sentiments that justify emotions rather than explain the solutions rationally.
    I’m more worried about ending the Marxist-to-woke cult than anything else. Because it’s what’s prohibiting our restoration = because our restoration requires responsibility and the entire leftist corpus is a promise of irresponsibility and freedom from the laws of nature – which of course, is not only false, but suicidal. No more dark ages please.)

    Reply addressees: @CCrowley100 @QuixoteSword

    Source date (UTC): 2023-08-06 00:00:59 UTC

    Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687977030413844481

    Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/1687599004538777600