Curt Doolittle

Form: Outline

  • THE SEVEN LITTLE LIBERTARIANS 1) The libertarians that think that they can someh

    THE SEVEN LITTLE LIBERTARIANS

    1) The libertarians that think that they can somehow return to the classical liberal tradition, with old world families, women, and single parents in the voting pool.

    2) The libertarians that think that it is possible, if we just try, to convince people that our set of moral priorities and methods is superior then they will somehow see the light.

    3) The libertarians that think that we can incrementally implement policy that will gradually restore some semblance of liberty despite the various incentives that the lefts incrementalism has used to create dependence on the state.

    4) The libertarians that think that we can build a culture within a culture despite the overwhelming incentives for everyone else to prohibit us from doing so.

    5) The libertarians that think that moral outrage accomplish anything other than giving themselves a sense of superiority. When it means the opposite.

    6) The libertarians that advocate separatism as the only means of obtaining our freedom, while letting the others retain their communalism.

    7) The libertarians that want to use every possible tactic to overthrow and delegitimize the state so that they can force a libertarian society into being, out of nothing more than self defense.

    There is an interesting pattern here….

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-16 09:56:00 UTC

  • MORAL HIERARCHY: 1) I CAN USE THAT IN MY LIFE 2) I CAN HOLD OTHERS ACCOUNTABLE F

    MORAL HIERARCHY:

    1) I CAN USE THAT IN MY LIFE

    2) I CAN HOLD OTHERS ACCOUNTABLE FOR THAT

    3) WE SHOULD ALL ACT TO PERPETUATE THAT

    4) WE SHOULD ALL SACRIFICE TO CONTRIBUTE TO THAT

    Which cultures employ which techniques. Why? Family structure.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-12 17:13:00 UTC

  • ON THE HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL MODELS AND ARGUMENTS. HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL SYSTEMS 1

    ON THE HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL MODELS AND ARGUMENTS.

    HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL SYSTEMS

    1) Virtue Ethics (imitation)

    2) Rule Ethics (deontological ethics)

    3) Outcome Ethics (teleological ethics)

    All of us that we describe as functioning humans can imitate the virtuous. As we mature we can understand the value of normative rules. As we gain wisdom and knowledge we can grasp the different outcomes that are produced by nuances. But more importantly, ethics are the list of rules by which we are forgiven for our errors, and lauded for our successes. We will not be chastised as a child for imitating virtue even if we err. We will not be chastised as an adult for following ethical rules, even if we err. We will not be chastised in our late maturity for following teleological ethics even if we err.

    HIERARCHY OF ETHICAL ARGUMENTS

    1) Sentimental

    2) Moral

    3) Rational

    4) Scientific

    5) Economic

    6) Ratio-Scientific (including economics)

    WE HUMANS EXIST IN VARIOUS AGES, with various knowledge, with various cognitive abilities. We must all cooperate given those differences. We must give the young and inexperienced what they can use, and the wizened and aged what they can use. And we must work together with our youth and age to cooperate for mutually beneficial ends.

    FOR ANY POLITICAL MOVEMENT TO SUCCEED it must produce the entire suite of arguments. Because humans can only grasp some maximum level of argument given their abilities and knowledge at any given point. If you wait until all members can argue ratio-scientifically then you will never achieve your political goals. If you argue sentimentally and morally you can never defeat your opponents.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-08 05:00:00 UTC

  • ZOROASTER ABRAHAM JESUS MARX FREUD CANTOR AND AQUINAS ROUSSEAU KANT HEIDEGGER FO

    ZOROASTER ABRAHAM JESUS MARX FREUD CANTOR

    AND

    AQUINAS ROUSSEAU KANT HEIDEGGER FOUCAULT DERRIDA RORTY

    -VS-

    ARISTOTLE BACON DESCARTES NEWTON PIERCE POPPER-KUHN

    AND

    MACHIAVELLI LOCKE SMITH HUME DARWIN HAYEK

    Why does philosophy have to be such a 50/50 proposition between intellectual biohazards, and intellectual steroids?

    It’s freaking exasperating that it takes one most of one’s life to master intellectual history marginally well enough to know what is poison and hallucinogen, and what is vitamin and antidote.

    (Now, I get to have some debate no doubt on who I included and didn’t and why, just like we’re talking about why I don’t like java and I like PHP more than Python. lol.)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-06 10:02:00 UTC

  • (REPOST) THE HIERARCHY OF ARGUMENTS: Expressive, Sentimental, Moral, Historical,

    (REPOST) THE HIERARCHY OF ARGUMENTS:

    Expressive, Sentimental, Moral, Historical, Scientific, Economic, Ratio-Scientific.

    I developed this list in order to classify the structure of different political arguments, in the hope that could increase awareness of what makes stronger and weaker arguments, in my ongoing attempt to give conservatives a ratio-scientific means of conducting aristocratic egalitarian arguments.

    EXCERPT:

    I. DEGREES OF POLITICAL ARGUMENT

    ——————————————————–

    Curt Doolittle’s “Degrees Of Political Argument”*1, from least to most substantive: *1[capitalismv3.com 2011]

    1) EXPRESSIVE (emotional): a type of argument where a person expresses a positive or negative opinion based upon his emotional response to the subject.

    2) SENTIMENTAL (biological): a type of argument that relies upon one of the five (or six) human sentiments, and their artifacts as captured in human traditions, morals, or other unarticulated, but nevertheless consistently and universally demonstrated preferences and behaviors.

    3) MORAL (normative) : a type of argument that relies upon a set of assumedly normative rules of whose origin is either (a)socially contractual, (b)biologically natural, (c) economically necessary, or even (d)divine.

    4) HISTORICAL (analogical): A spectrum of analogical arguments – from Historical to Anecdotal — that rely upon a relationship between a historical sequence of events, and a present sequence events, in order to suggest that the current events will come to the same conclusion as did the past events, or can be used to invalidate or validate assumptions about the current period.

    5) SCIENTIFIC (directly empirical): The use of a set of measurements that produce data that can be used to prove or disprove an hypothesis, but which are subject to human cognitive biases and preferences. ie: ‘Bottom up analysis”

    6) ECONOMIC: (indirectly empirical): The use of a set of measures consisting of uncontrolled variables, for the purpose of circumventing the problems of direct human inquiry into human preferences, by the process of capturing demonstrated preferences, as expressed by human exchanges, usually in the form of money. ie: “Top Down Analysis”. The weakness of economic arguments is caused by the elimination of properties and causes that are necessary for the process of aggregation.

    7) RATIO-SCIENTIFIC (Comprehensive: Using all above): A rationally articulated argument that makes use of economic, scientific, historical, normative and sentimental information to comprehensively prove that a position is defensible under all objections.

    —–

    Cheers

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-05 02:11:00 UTC

  • ON FREEDOM: THE ABSENCE OF EXTERNAL CONSTRAINT TYPES OF FREEDOM 1) INDIVIDUAL FR

    ON FREEDOM: THE ABSENCE OF EXTERNAL CONSTRAINT

    TYPES OF FREEDOM

    1) INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM: freedom of thought, action, property exchange. The freedom to cooperate for INDIVIDUAL ends.

    2) POLITICAL FREEDOM: speech, assembly, leadership, concentration of wealth. (The right to cooperate against others who have a similar right) The freedom to cooperate for GROUP ends.

    3) LEGISLATIVE FREEDOM: This includes the freedom to establish property definitions (real, several, built) as well as abstract (patents, options), as well as enforce normative opportunity cost payments, including manners, ethics and morals, and normative tax payments for a multitude of purposes.

    4) NATIONAL FREEDOM: freedom to control and compete for resources by establishing legal monopoly on violence over geographic territory. (In other words, adding territory to legal freedom.)

    5) CULTURAL FREEDOM: Freedom to employ, coerce, convert, and compete using different opportunity cost norms (opportunity cost payments required of members) as a means of competing against other groups who have different opportunity costs, and different capital structures.

    6) REDISTRIBUTIVE FREEDOM: Freedom to claim a share of proceeds of production, earned by virtue of adhering to norms (bearing costs of adhering to norms), despite lack of control over resources, participation in production, or influence over the productivity of those resources, except by voluntary restraint. (Restraint is a real opportunity cost to individuals.) This is the correct non-platonic definition of economic freedom that describes human actions in the productive process.

    THE ONLY NON-CONTRADICTORY FREEDOM

    The only form of ‘freedom’ you can have, that is non-contradictory (you can equally grant it to others and they to you) is personal, individual freedom.

    And even then, the only form of political freedom you can have is to DENY others the right to their political freedom.

    And at that point you are stuck with the problem of either getting to the point where you can convert the barbarians into paying the opportunity cost of becoming property holders in the first place, (establishing the system of property definitions) and without that need for coercion, you’re stuck in poverty even if you want to change the established order.

    The only freedom you can logically have is individual freedom – the freedom of constraint. We can grant it to others equally. The rest of the freedoms are not ‘freedom’. They’re rights to take from others. All political freedoms are rights to take from others. They are rights of coercion, oppression. But then one cannot have a division of labor, a complex society, economic calculation, and the incentive to participate in productive activities unless you apply the ‘coercion’ of private property – at least to some degree.

    Private property as we understand it is unnatural to man, just as debate as we understand it, using reason and objective truth is unnatural and uncommon to man. It was an INNOVATION. Private property was at best, limited to one’s body, and wearable possessions. In the case of many societies, and some societies today which marry off children. It was only in the west that we developed the nuclear family, Paternal property rights, evolved property rights for women, and therefore universal property rights.

    And the socialists have been trying to return us to primitivism for almost two centuries now.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-10-02 06:18:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIAN MISSION 1) CORRECTION To correct libertarian morality by completing

    LIBERTARIAN MISSION

    1) CORRECTION

    To correct libertarian morality by completing it with propertarian morality necessary and sufficient to preserve a high trust society.

    2) RECONSTRUCTION

    To reconstruct libertarianism relying entirely on ratio – scientific arguments.

    3) REDIRECTION

    To focus libertarian argument on postmodernism rather than socialism, now that we have sufficient evidence to do so.

    4) ENFRANCHISEMENT

    To provide a rational, scientific language of sufficient scope and depth to unite conservatives and libertarians using propertarian reasoning to explain libertarian formal institutions and conservative (aristocratic) informal institutions (norms), as mutually dependent sets of institutions.

    5) JUSTIFICATION

    To restore violence as the first, necessary, and sufficient requirement for creation and persistence of the institution and of property, and the freedom and liberty that result from it.

    6) RESULT

    To provide a means for a minority of those of us who prefer property rights, freedom to act and liberty from constraint to obtain and persist all, and to justify that means as morally necessary, obligatory, and just.

    The bourgeoise are free riders: thieves. Aristocracy is earned. It is not a right. It is demanded. It is taken. And it is taken by force if needed.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-09-08 11:39:00 UTC

  • LIST OF STARTUP RULES (Dated but fun.) 1. Your idea isn’t new. Pick an idea; at

    LIST OF STARTUP RULES

    (Dated but fun.)

    1. Your idea isn’t new. Pick an idea; at least 50 other people have thought of it. Get over your stunning brilliance and realize that execution matters more.

    2. Stealth startups suck. You’re not working on the Manhattan Project, Einstein. Get something out as quickly as possible and promote the hell out of it.

    3. If you don’t have scaling problems, you’re not growing fast enough.

    4. If you’re successful, people will try to take advantage of you. Hope that you’re in that position, and hope that you’re smart enough to not fall for it.

    5. People will tell you they know more than you do. If that’s really the case, you shouldn’t be doing your startup.

    6. Your competition will inflate their numbers. Take any startup traffic number and slash it in half. At least.

    7. Perfection is the enemy of good enough. Leonardo could paint the Mona Lisa only once. You, Bob Ross, can push a bug release every 5 minutes because you were at least smart enough to do a web app.

    8. The size of your startup is not a reflection of your manhood. More employees does not make you more of a man (or woman as the case may be).

    9. You don’t need business development people. If you’re successful, companies will come to you. The deals will still be distractions and not worth doing, but at least you’re not spending any effort trying to get them.

    10. You have to be wrong in the head to start a company. But we have all the fun.

    11. Starting a company will teach you what it’s like to be a manic depressive. They, at least, can take medication.

    12. Your startup isn’t succeeding? You have two options: go home with your tail between your legs or do something about it. What’s it going to be?

    13. If you don’t pay attention to your competition, they will turn out to be geniuses and will crush you. If you do pay attention to them, they will turn out to be idiots and you will have wasted your time. Which would you prefer?

    14. Startups are not a democracy. Want a democracy? Go run for class president, Bueller.

    15. You’re doing a web app, right? This isn’t the 1980s. Your crummy, half-assed web app will still be more successful than your competitor’s most polished software application.

    – Mark Fletcher

    Source date (UTC): 2013-08-27 06:45:00 UTC

  • What Are The Biggest Unsolved Intellectual Problems In The World Today?

    1) If we are to supply money to the economy, how do we know how much? When are we causing more distortion than good?
    2) There is something wrong with the standard model.  What is the theory of the universe? The theory of ‘everything’?
    3) What is the human population load bearing capacity of the planet? What is the next malthusian limit?
    4) Is our progress since the industrial revolution little more than capturing hydrocarbons?  And if so, what happens when they’re gone?
    5) Our anti-bacterial technology is losing effectiveness, and we still have not found an anti-viral solution.
    6) Is Modern Monetary Theory possible, or will it produce perpetual, and destabilizing inflation?
    7) We still have not solved the mind-body problem to everyone’s satisfaction. What is the answer?
    8) What’s ‘after democracy’?  Because democracy apparently has very hard limits to where it will function, and seems to be of limited use outside of a small number of countries.
    9) Is diversity really a good?  It doesn’t look like it.  And how do we solve that?
    10) The problem of transhumanism: what does this mean for us?
    11) The problem of the technological singularity.
    12) What will happen if we have fully taken advantage of industrialization and we have half of the world’s population permanently poor and living in slums?

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-biggest-unsolved-intellectual-problems-in-the-world-today

  • What Are The Biggest Unsolved Intellectual Problems In The World Today?

    1) If we are to supply money to the economy, how do we know how much? When are we causing more distortion than good?
    2) There is something wrong with the standard model.  What is the theory of the universe? The theory of ‘everything’?
    3) What is the human population load bearing capacity of the planet? What is the next malthusian limit?
    4) Is our progress since the industrial revolution little more than capturing hydrocarbons?  And if so, what happens when they’re gone?
    5) Our anti-bacterial technology is losing effectiveness, and we still have not found an anti-viral solution.
    6) Is Modern Monetary Theory possible, or will it produce perpetual, and destabilizing inflation?
    7) We still have not solved the mind-body problem to everyone’s satisfaction. What is the answer?
    8) What’s ‘after democracy’?  Because democracy apparently has very hard limits to where it will function, and seems to be of limited use outside of a small number of countries.
    9) Is diversity really a good?  It doesn’t look like it.  And how do we solve that?
    10) The problem of transhumanism: what does this mean for us?
    11) The problem of the technological singularity.
    12) What will happen if we have fully taken advantage of industrialization and we have half of the world’s population permanently poor and living in slums?

    https://www.quora.com/What-are-the-biggest-unsolved-intellectual-problems-in-the-world-today