OK. so I will make a painful set of observations that I promise are correct.
1) never, ever, every, extrapolate a curve. Almost every human error in intellectual history has been the result of doing so.
2) all phenomenon in the universe produces cycles of that repeat at increasing scales, because the maximum energy use given the available operations (lie groups) create multipliers at their maximum causal density. (Think subatomic, atomic, chemical, organic, sentient, environmental, economic, energy-production.)
3) Every quadrant in the diagram is the victim of this error.
4) If this diagram were true we would not encounter speciation. But we do. We would not find a LIMIT to subatomic multipliers in atomic interactions. We would not find a LIMIT to atomic multipliers in the chemical interactions, and not find a limit to chemical multipliers in biological interactions. But we do.
5) The question is, what is the limit of cooperation at human scale before cooperation is NO LONGER OF VALUE, and competition is of higher value.
6) all theories (descriptions of possible operations made possible by causal relations) have limits, and only in the expression of these limits do we test (subject to falsification) our theories.
7) All theories must be internally consistent, externally correspondent, operationally possible, limited, and scope complete. In the case of sentient theories, they must be
8) This chart is missing either LAW or PROPERTY, or SUPPRESSION OF DEGREES OF PARASITISM BY NORM ETHIC MORAL AND LAW.
I don’t have time at the moment to spend more time on the subject but I think northwest is out of order, southweste is out of order becasue reason was a late development and contract early, and I don’t now whether contract refers to agreement, and normative habit or third party insurance, northwest and southeast are … justificationary not predictive. NOrtheast is conflating instruments and fiat is in the wrong place, and derivatives is incorrect.
The general idea CAN be done. I do it. But until you significantly increase causal density (the number of axis) and realize we make excuses and narratives to justify our siezure of opportunities, it will simply be justificationary, and neither descriptive or predictive.
At what point is cooperation no longer in one’s interest? A tribe’s? A nation’s? A civilization’s?
What civilizations resist cooperation today and why?
Form: Outline
-
OK. so I will make a painful set of observations that I promise are correct. 1)
OK. so I will make a painful set of observations that I promise are correct.
1) never, ever, every, extrapolate a curve. Almost every human error in intellectual history has been the result of doing so.
2) all phenomenon in the universe produces cycles of that repeat at increasing scales, because the maximum energy use given the available operations (lie groups) create multipliers at their maximum causal density. (Think subatomic, atomic, chemical, organic, sentient, environmental, economic, energy-production.)
3) Every quadrant in the diagram is the victim of this error.
4) If this diagram were true we would not encounter speciation. But we do. We would not find a LIMIT to subatomic multipliers in atomic interactions. We would not find a LIMIT to atomic multipliers in the chemical interactions, and not find a limit to chemical multipliers in biological interactions. But we do.
5) The question is, what is the limit of cooperation at human scale before cooperation is NO LONGER OF VALUE, and competition is of higher value.
6) all theories (descriptions of possible operations made possible by causal relations) have limits, and only in the expression of these limits do we test (subject to falsification) our theories.
7) All theories must be internally consistent, externally correspondent, operationally possible, limited, and scope complete. In the case of sentient theories, they must be
8) This chart is missing either LAW or PROPERTY, or SUPPRESSION OF DEGREES OF PARASITISM BY NORM ETHIC MORAL AND LAW.
I don’t have time at the moment to spend more time on the subject but I think northwest is out of order, southweste is out of order becasue reason was a late development and contract early, and I don’t now whether contract refers to agreement, and normative habit or third party insurance, northwest and southeast are … justificationary not predictive. NOrtheast is conflating instruments and fiat is in the wrong place, and derivatives is incorrect.
The general idea CAN be done. I do it. But until you significantly increase causal density (the number of axis) and realize we make excuses and narratives to justify our siezure of opportunities, it will simply be justificationary, and neither descriptive or predictive.
At what point is cooperation no longer in one’s interest? A tribe’s? A nation’s? A civilization’s?
What civilizations resist cooperation today and why?
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-14 09:48:00 UTC
-
OK. so I will make a painful set of observations that I promise are correct. 1)
OK. so I will make a painful set of observations that I promise are correct. 1) never, ever, every, extrapolate a curve. Almost every human error in intellectual history has been the result of doing so. 2) all phenomenon in the universe produces cycles of that repeat at increasing scales, because the maximum energy use given the available operations (lie groups) create multipliers at their maximum causal density. (Think subatomic, atomic, chemical, organic, sentient, environmental, economic, energy-production.) 3) Every quadrant in the diagram is the victim of this error. 4) If this diagram were true we would not encounter speciation. But we do. We would not find a LIMIT to subatomic multipliers in atomic interactions. We would not find a LIMIT to atomic multipliers in the chemical interactions, and not find a limit to chemical multipliers in biological interactions. But we do. 5) The question is, what is the limit of cooperation at human scale before cooperation is NO LONGER OF VALUE, and competition is of higher value. 6) all theories (descriptions of possible operations made possible by causal relations) have limits, and only in the expression of these limits do we test (subject to falsification) our theories. 7) All theories must be internally consistent, externally correspondent, operationally possible, limited, and scope complete. In the case of sentient theories, they must be 8) This chart is missing either LAW or PROPERTY, or SUPPRESSION OF DEGREES OF PARASITISM BY NORM ETHIC MORAL AND LAW. I don’t have time at the moment to spend more time on the subject but I think northwest is out of order, southweste is out of order becasue reason was a late development and contract early, and I don’t now whether contract refers to agreement, and normative habit or third party insurance, northwest and southeast are … justificationary not predictive. NOrtheast is conflating instruments and fiat is in the wrong place, and derivatives is incorrect. The general idea CAN be done. I do it. But until you significantly increase causal density (the number of axis) and realize we make excuses and narratives to justify our siezure of opportunities, it will simply be justificationary, and neither descriptive or predictive. At what point is cooperation no longer in one’s interest? A tribe’s? A nation’s? A civilization’s? What civilizations resist cooperation today and why? -
The History Of The Ending Of The Abrahamic Dark Age Made Possible By The Empirical Enlightenment.
Of the English revolution, The American revolution The French Revolution The The German Revolution The Jewish Revolution And the Russian Revolution … And the Indian Revolution And the Chinese Revolution…. And the South American Revolution…. And now the muslim revolution…. How long did the ‘change’ take? What were the consequences both good and bad? What ‘century’ have we just finished. If you simply take a timeline, and stack those time periods, what you’ll see is that we endure from very short periods of peaceful change (German) to civil wars (English and American and Indian) to destructive but not bloody( south American) to bloody (Russian and French), to devastatingly bloody and persistent (Jewish), to extraordinarily bloody (Chinese and Muslim). -
THE HISTORY OF THE ENDING OF THE ABRAHAMIC DARK AGE MADE POSSIBLE BY THE EMPIRIC
THE HISTORY OF THE ENDING OF THE ABRAHAMIC DARK AGE MADE POSSIBLE BY THE EMPIRICAL ENLIGHTENMENT.
Of the English revolution,
The American revolution
The French Revolution
The The German Revolution
The Jewish Revolution
And the Russian Revolution …
And the Indian Revolution
And the Chinese Revolution….
And the South American Revolution….
And now the muslim revolution….
How long did the ‘change’ take?
What were the consequences both good and bad?
What ‘century’ have we just finished.
If you simply take a timeline, and stack those time periods, what you’ll see is that we endure from very short periods of peaceful change (German) to civil wars (English and American and Indian) to destructive but not bloody( south American) to bloody (Russian and French), to devastatingly bloody and persistent (Jewish), to extraordinarily bloody (Chinese and Muslim).
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-06 15:14:00 UTC
-
The History Of The Ending Of The Abrahamic Dark Age Made Possible By The Empirical Enlightenment.
Of the English revolution, The American revolution The French Revolution The The German Revolution The Jewish Revolution And the Russian Revolution … And the Indian Revolution And the Chinese Revolution…. And the South American Revolution…. And now the muslim revolution…. How long did the ‘change’ take? What were the consequences both good and bad? What ‘century’ have we just finished. If you simply take a timeline, and stack those time periods, what you’ll see is that we endure from very short periods of peaceful change (German) to civil wars (English and American and Indian) to destructive but not bloody( south American) to bloody (Russian and French), to devastatingly bloody and persistent (Jewish), to extraordinarily bloody (Chinese and Muslim). -
Outline
(If I am lucky this will help a great deal) – Acquisitiveness (humans acquire, and must, and decidability is provided by acquisition – its just determining what they want to acquire.) – Signaling (reproductive, productive. and social fitness.) – Conspicuous Consumption (Signalling) – Virtue Signaling (truthful, vs fraudulent) – Three possible means of persuasion(violence, payment, shaming) – Scale: Shaming > Gossip > Rallying > Publishing > Media > Propaganda > Literature > Pseudo-philosophy/Pseudo-rationalism > Pseudoscience > Mysticism(magic) > Outright Lying. – Incremental suppression (killing > violence > theft > fraud > parasitism > free riding > privatization/socialization > conspiracy > institutionalism > propagandism(fictionalism) > conversion > over-reproduction > immigration > invasion > war > ethnocide > genocide ) – use of natural law of tort(Reciprocity) to require warranty of truthful speech in the commons just as we require warranty of products and services, and the statements about those products and services. Why have we not required truth in public speech other than until now, we were not sure how to create a test of truthfulness of speech? -
OUTLINE (If I am lucky this will help a great deal) – Acquisitiveness (humans ac
OUTLINE
(If I am lucky this will help a great deal)
– Acquisitiveness (humans acquire, and must, and decidability is provided by acquisition – its just determining what they want to acquire.)
– Signaling (reproductive, productive. and social fitness.)
– Conspicuous Consumption (Signalling)
– Virtue Signaling (truthful, vs fraudulent)
– Three possible means of persuasion(violence, payment, shaming)
– Scale: Shaming > Gossip > Rallying > Publishing > Media >
Propaganda > Literature > Pseudo-philosophy/Pseudo-rationalism > Pseudoscience > Mysticism(magic) > Outright Lying.
– Incremental suppression (killing > violence > theft > fraud > parasitism > free riding > privatization/socialization > conspiracy > institutionalism > propagandism(fictionalism) > conversion > over-reproduction > immigration > invasion > war > ethnocide > genocide )
– use of natural law of tort(Reciprocity) to require warranty of truthful speech in the commons just as we require warranty of products and services, and the statements about those products and services. Why have we not required truth in public speech other than until now, we were not sure how to create a test of truthfulness of speech?
Source date (UTC): 2018-01-05 11:45:00 UTC
-
Outline
(If I am lucky this will help a great deal) – Acquisitiveness (humans acquire, and must, and decidability is provided by acquisition – its just determining what they want to acquire.) – Signaling (reproductive, productive. and social fitness.) – Conspicuous Consumption (Signalling) – Virtue Signaling (truthful, vs fraudulent) – Three possible means of persuasion(violence, payment, shaming) – Scale: Shaming > Gossip > Rallying > Publishing > Media > Propaganda > Literature > Pseudo-philosophy/Pseudo-rationalism > Pseudoscience > Mysticism(magic) > Outright Lying. – Incremental suppression (killing > violence > theft > fraud > parasitism > free riding > privatization/socialization > conspiracy > institutionalism > propagandism(fictionalism) > conversion > over-reproduction > immigration > invasion > war > ethnocide > genocide ) – use of natural law of tort(Reciprocity) to require warranty of truthful speech in the commons just as we require warranty of products and services, and the statements about those products and services. Why have we not required truth in public speech other than until now, we were not sure how to create a test of truthfulness of speech? -
Parsimonious Kinship Government
Rule of Natural Law, Mandatory Kinship Accountability and Insurance, Hereditary Monarchy, Regional And Local Nobility. Market Fascism (meritocracy), flat taxation on commerce. The production of commons either private or monarchic, Absent any ‘government’ (Politics). Eric Danelaw once you make people accountable for their kin again, the result will be ethno nationalism Always use the law to manage incentives, and the desired result will emerge from market forces.