Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • CHALLENGING THOUGHT OF THE DAY (useful) 0 – We are unequally desirable mates – t

    CHALLENGING THOUGHT OF THE DAY

    (useful)

    0 – We are unequally desirable mates – this is necessary for evolutionary adaptation.

    1 – We evolved a reproductive division of labor – the genders.

    2 – We evolved an inter-temporal division of reproductive labor:

    4 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term preferences;

    5 – We demonstrate short, medium, and long term moral biases;

    6 – We evolved, quite naturally, lower(<95), middle(<125) and upper(>125) classes;

    7 – We need virtue(imitative), rule (rational), and outcome (scientific) ethics;

    8 – We need sacred(religious), moral(normative), and calculative (legal) rules;

    9 – We rely upon intuitive(experiential), conscious(rational), and instrumental(calculative) tools to made decisions.

    10 – Our moral biases reflect our reproductive strategies.

    11 – Our normative biases reflect our reproductive strategies.

    12 – Our formal and informal institutions reflect our group-competitive strategies.

    13 – All universalist strategy is to extend group-competitive strategies to dominate other group competitive strategies.

    Short term strategy is in the interest of the lower classes (socialism – labor)

    Medium term strategy is in the interest of the middle classes (classical liberty – trade)

    Long term strategy is in the interests of the upper classes (aristocracy – order)

    Some people are only CAPABLE of sentimental talk and argument.

    Some people are only CAPABLE of rational talk and argument.

    Some people are CAPABLE of scientific talk and argument.

    So what does all of this tell us about persuading others? It tells us that we cannot (and should not) try. It tells us to create institutions that allow cooperation across moral codes and reproductive strategies. It tells us that the majority cannot understand these matters except experientially – once implemented.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-27 04:37:00 UTC

  • THREE INSTRUMENTS (worth repeating) We construct three forms of instruments. 1-

    THREE INSTRUMENTS

    (worth repeating)

    We construct three forms of instruments.

    1- Physical Instrumentation (the instruments)

    2- Logical Instrumentation (the logics and methods)

    3- Social Instrumentation (institutional)

    And of three, the third is most important, since it is the hardest to develop and control, because the incentives of individuals are contrary to the production of instrumental measurements.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-25 16:24:00 UTC

  • 1) HEROISM and SOVEREIGNTY(Competition), 2) TECHNOLOGY, 3) PROPERTY, 4) TRUTH an

    1) HEROISM and SOVEREIGNTY(Competition), 2) TECHNOLOGY, 3) PROPERTY, 4) TRUTH and PROMISE(CONTRACT), 5) JURY, 6) THE HANDS-OFF COMMONS (Sacred Commons).

    That is ‘our way’. Nial Ferguson’s six killer apps are consequences (Pareto’s Derivations) not CAUSES (Hegelian differences) nor instincts and intuitions (Pareto’s ‘Residues’).

    The western difference is our struggle to speak the truth before the jury of our peers.

    It is NOT majority rule.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-22 02:38:00 UTC

  • Why Do We Justify Our Arguments?

    [W]E JUSTIFY:
    (a) To convey meaning – to provide a path by which we incrementally transfer properties by analogy to achieve conclusions.
    (b) To convey honesty – to demonstrate that we are telling the truth to the best of our understanding.
    (c) To demonstrate the we adhere to NORMS in our reasoning – that we have not violated the social contract. (This is how we get into all sorts of interesting problems. Because truth is only truth in the sense that we mean it, in the west.)

    AND CONVERSELY:

    (d) To lie – to lead others to false conclusions by design.
    (e) To vector a lie for pragmatic purposes – to lead others to conclusions we prefer using the arguments of others as a matter of practical action.

    AND HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THE FORMER WITHOUT THE LATTER?

    (f) separate the route by which we establish meaning, from the route by which we demonstrate truth. It is possible to construct a theory by any means, but it is only possible to testify to the truth of it by operational means – existentially possible means, and in matters of human action, SUBJECTIVELY TESTABLE means. (rationality of incentives).

    MATH CONFUSED US.

    In mathematics, at least, for the most part, the means of conducting operations to solve a problem is nearly identical to the means of demonstrating the construction of a solution using existentially possible operations.

    We sought to copy mathematics – starting with the Greeks.  But we lacked the understanding of why math was so effective at the ascertaining truth of relations: because there is very little difference between the process of theorizing and the process of construction.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute

  • Why Do We Justify Our Arguments?

    [W]E JUSTIFY:
    (a) To convey meaning – to provide a path by which we incrementally transfer properties by analogy to achieve conclusions.
    (b) To convey honesty – to demonstrate that we are telling the truth to the best of our understanding.
    (c) To demonstrate the we adhere to NORMS in our reasoning – that we have not violated the social contract. (This is how we get into all sorts of interesting problems. Because truth is only truth in the sense that we mean it, in the west.)

    AND CONVERSELY:

    (d) To lie – to lead others to false conclusions by design.
    (e) To vector a lie for pragmatic purposes – to lead others to conclusions we prefer using the arguments of others as a matter of practical action.

    AND HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THE FORMER WITHOUT THE LATTER?

    (f) separate the route by which we establish meaning, from the route by which we demonstrate truth. It is possible to construct a theory by any means, but it is only possible to testify to the truth of it by operational means – existentially possible means, and in matters of human action, SUBJECTIVELY TESTABLE means. (rationality of incentives).

    MATH CONFUSED US.

    In mathematics, at least, for the most part, the means of conducting operations to solve a problem is nearly identical to the means of demonstrating the construction of a solution using existentially possible operations.

    We sought to copy mathematics – starting with the Greeks.  But we lacked the understanding of why math was so effective at the ascertaining truth of relations: because there is very little difference between the process of theorizing and the process of construction.

    Curt Doolittle
    The Propertarian Institute

  • WHY DO WE JUSTIFY OUR ARGUMENTS? (a) To convey meaning – to provide a path by wh

    WHY DO WE JUSTIFY OUR ARGUMENTS?

    (a) To convey meaning – to provide a path by which we incrementally transfer properties by analogy to achieve conclusions.

    (b) To convey honesty – to demonstrate that we are telling the truth to the best of our understanding.

    (c) To demonstrate the we adhere to NORMS in our reasoning – that we have not violated the social contract. (This is how we get into all sorts of interesting problems. Because truth is only truth in the sense that we mean it, in the west.)

    AND CONVERSELY:

    (d) To lie – to lead others to false conclusions by design.

    (e) To vector a lie for pragmatic purposes – to lead others to conclusions we prefer using the arguments of others as a matter of practical action.

    AND HOW DO WE ACHIEVE THE FORMER WITHOUT THE LATTER?

    (f) separate the route by which we establish meaning, from the route by which we demonstrate truth. It is possible to construct a theory by any means, but it is only possible to testify to the truth of it by operational means – existentially possible means, and in matters of human action, SUBJECTIVELY TESTABLE means. (rationality of incentives).

    MATH CONFUSED US.

    In mathematics, at least, for the most part, the means of conducting operations to solve a problem is nearly identical to the means of demonstrating the construction of a solution using existentially possible operations.

    We sought to copy mathematics – starting with the Greeks. But we lacked the understanding of why math was so effective at the ascertaining truth of relations: because there is very little difference between the process of theorizing and the process of construction.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-21 04:19:00 UTC

  • The Construction of Political Orders


    [H]ow we construct classical liberalism from Anarcho-Capitalism, and Anarcho-Capitalism from Nomocracy, and Nomocracy from Capitalism. You can’t do it any other way you know.

    1. Capitalism (property rights) = Voluntary Organization of Production
    2. Nomocracy (Rule of Law) = Organic Evolution of Law
    3. Anarcho-… (anarchy) A Covenential Prohibition on Government.
    …….. Removal of All Political Liberty.
    4. Voluntary Contractual Covenants (Formation of a polity )
    …….. Removal of Some Liberty on use of Property
    5. Mandatory Contractual Covenants (Perpetuation of a Polity)
    …….. Example: Removal of Liberty of Association and Disassociation
    6. Mandatory Contractual Covenants for the Production of Commons (Government).
    …….. Removal of Anarchic Prohibition in exchange for the construction of commons.

    THIS DESCRIBES CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, NOT ANARCHO-CAPITALISM.

    (Reminder: A Covenant is a Constitution without provision for government.)

  • The Construction of Political Orders


    [H]ow we construct classical liberalism from Anarcho-Capitalism, and Anarcho-Capitalism from Nomocracy, and Nomocracy from Capitalism. You can’t do it any other way you know.

    1. Capitalism (property rights) = Voluntary Organization of Production
    2. Nomocracy (Rule of Law) = Organic Evolution of Law
    3. Anarcho-… (anarchy) A Covenential Prohibition on Government.
    …….. Removal of All Political Liberty.
    4. Voluntary Contractual Covenants (Formation of a polity )
    …….. Removal of Some Liberty on use of Property
    5. Mandatory Contractual Covenants (Perpetuation of a Polity)
    …….. Example: Removal of Liberty of Association and Disassociation
    6. Mandatory Contractual Covenants for the Production of Commons (Government).
    …….. Removal of Anarchic Prohibition in exchange for the construction of commons.

    THIS DESCRIBES CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, NOT ANARCHO-CAPITALISM.

    (Reminder: A Covenant is a Constitution without provision for government.)

  • EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL ORDERS How we evolve classical liberalism from Anarcho-Ca

    EVOLUTION OF POLITICAL ORDERS

    How we evolve classical liberalism from Anarcho-Capitalism, and Anarcho-

    Capitalism from Nomocracy, and Nomocracy from Capitalism. You can’t do it any other way you know. 😉

    1) Capitalism (property rights) = Voluntary Organization of Production

    2) Nomocracy (Rule of Law) = Organic Evolution of Law

    3) Anarcho-… (anarchy) A Covenential Prohibition on Government.

    …….. Removal of All Political Liberty.

    4) Voluntary Contractual Covenants (Formation of a polity )

    …….. Removal of Some Liberty on use of Property

    5) Mandatory Contractual Covenants (Perpetuation of a Polity)

    …….. Example: Removal of Liberty of Association and Disassociation

    6) Mandatory Contractual Covenants for the Production of Commons (Government).

    …….. Removal of Anarchic Prohibition in exchange for the construction of commons.

    THIS DESCRIBES CLASSICAL LIBERALISM, NOT ANARCHO-CAPITALISM.

    (Reminder: A Covenant is a Constitution without provision for government.)

    Source date (UTC): 2014-11-18 02:09:00 UTC

  • THE FEMALE EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY = THE POSTMODERN STRATEGY 1) Attract Attention

    THE FEMALE EVOLUTIONARY STRATEGY = THE POSTMODERN STRATEGY

    1) Attract Attention (promise sex, affection, subsidy/rent or attention)

    2) Rally.

    3) Shame.

    4) Gossip (load and frame)

    5) Overload (persistence)

    6) Change to outright lying. (shift)

    It works. It works if you don’t use violence and truth to suppress it.

    Source date (UTC): 2014-10-30 11:16:00 UTC