Why are conservative women so sane and good company?
Why aren’t there more of them?
(Thank god for the female friends I have.)
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-25 17:33:00 UTC
Form: Question
-
Why are conservative women so sane and good company? Why aren’t there more of th
-
Do I understand correctly? That Russia Today (RT) bank accounts have been siezed
Do I understand correctly? That Russia Today (RT) bank accounts have been siezed and closed?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-17 15:24:00 UTC
-
Why do we have such a mental health problem compared to Europe? Family?
Why do we have such a mental health problem compared to Europe? Family?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-13 00:31:50 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/786363784659034112
Reply addressees: @JonHaidt
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/786239583973285888
IN REPLY TO:
Original post on X
Original tweet unavailable — we could not load the text of the post this reply is addressing on X. That usually means the tweet was deleted, the account is protected, or X does not expose it to the account used for archiving. The Original post link below may still open if you view it in X while signed in.
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/786239583973285888
-
Deceiving, negotiating, justifying, testifying, and criticizing are different ac
Deceiving, negotiating, justifying, testifying, and criticizing are different activities. Right?
When we engage in negotiating with enemies, negotiating with customers, with family, with judge and jury, with fellow scientists are we using the same truth criteria?
We live lives of negotiation not argument, persuasion not truth, excuse-making not survival from criticism.
But in the end what does argumentative epistemology tell us about property?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-09 21:22:00 UTC
-
Curt: Who Are Your Influences?
—“Every philosopher can point out influences of which he may call his teachers or derive his ideas from. Nietzsche for instance read Schopenhauer, Epicurus, Plato, and Heraclitus among his other influences. So let us hear yours. How many people have you read, and who do you derive your thoughts from? (Btw, wikipedia level understanding does not count. You can’t cite someone as an influence unless you have read his works)”— Well, I answer this question a few times a year. And it might surprise you but I read science, economics and history and I think most philosophy by almost all philosophers is little more than simply semi-secular theology or empty verbalism for the purpose of middle-class criticism of the status quo. So in general, except for a few cases, I view philosophy largely as a poor investment as likely to do one harm as good just as philosophers have done as much or more harm as good. I would go so far as to say most philosophers are seeking to be creative liars.
My reading list is pretty extensive and published on my site. And I’ve read everything on it I think. Ramsey keeps all of the works in digital form in our library. And recently he has added new works to it that are relevant but that I have only skimmed. There is something in the content of the neutral point of view we find in encyclopedias. And aside from those works, I found the Germanic Fairy Tales, Pinnocchio, Johnny Tremain, Ivanhoe, Harlan Ellison, Heinlein, Ben Bova, and all the postwar science fiction authors fairly influential – they were all libertarian. I came to philosophy from artificial intelligence by way of Hayek and Popper – who were the first thinkers to suggest that we must study man using information not norms – just as we study physics now as information not forces. But Aristotle created a framework for the study of knowledge, and that framework has persisted throughout the centuries: existence, epistemology/truth, ethics, politics, aesthetics. This structure provides a hierarchy that as from the universe to the self to the interpersonal to the political to the universal. So when I wanted to create a language for the unloaded analysis and comparison of competing political strategies, and in particular to allow western aristocratic conservatives to rationally argue their strategy, I chose the structure of philosophy to do it because it’s the established language for discourse. The big change for me was popper and Hayek, and when I heard Hoppe lecture I knew something wasnt quite right but that the answer was in there somewhere. It took me years to get it right. By 2009 or so I had everything but one very hard problem. And solving that problem was the watershed: how to demand warranty of due diligence in matters of the commons. So while I write what we call philosophy, Propertarianism solves the Wilsonian Synthesis and united science, philosophy, morality, and law. What I am writing is natural law. The Only Possible Epistemology, Ethics and Politics of Sovereignty. -
Austyn Pember Can you give me (us) your opinion on the state of Etherium?
Austyn Pember
Can you give me (us) your opinion on the state of Etherium?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 17:57:00 UTC
-
Anyone know what happened to @Vivek Upadhyay?
Anyone know what happened to @Vivek Upadhyay?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 16:32:00 UTC
-
WAS THE GREATER ASSET WE STOLE FROM THE GODS? FIRE, OR TRUTH?
https://propertarianism.wordpress.com/2016/10/07/the-wests-other-promethian-fire/WHICH WAS THE GREATER ASSET WE STOLE FROM THE GODS? FIRE, OR TRUTH?
Source date (UTC): 2016-10-07 12:59:00 UTC
-
What Do You Consider Yourself?
DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A CLASSICAL LIBERAL? Maybe. In the sense that we can use the increase in proceeds from the agrarian, industrial, petrochemical, technological, information, and biological revolutions to construct commons by exchanges between houses, then yes. In the sense that we should extend the franchise to those who have not demonstrated ability to decide in favor of the commons, then no. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A LIBERTARIAN? Probably.Although I have come to understand that we use various terms for “Liberty”: Sovereignty for the martial class, Liberty for the middle class, Freedom for the labor class, and “Positive Freedom” (charity) for the underclasses. And that all of us mean something quite different by it. As such “Liberty” is a middle class ambition, and I do not consider myself first a member of the middle class, but of the lower (martial) aristocracy. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF ALT-RIGHT?No. I consider myself New Right. Alt right is a resistance movement not a revolutionary one. Complaints not solutions. I do solutions. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A WHITE NATIONALIST?No. I take the position that familism, tribalism, nationalism, under natural law will produce the best outcomes for each family, tribe, nation, and race. And as such all can transcend the animal we call man.
DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A NATIONAL SOCIALIST? No. Although I do feel that despite its terrible economics that it was one of the greatest and most beautiful ambitions ever created by man – until they adopted propaganda, pseudoscience, and outright lying. WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF? I consider myself Sovereign: An advocate for Aristocracy. Or what we might call a “Conservative Libertarian”. Even if that label tells us almost nothing useful. -
What Do You Consider Yourself?
DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A CLASSICAL LIBERAL? Maybe. In the sense that we can use the increase in proceeds from the agrarian, industrial, petrochemical, technological, information, and biological revolutions to construct commons by exchanges between houses, then yes. In the sense that we should extend the franchise to those who have not demonstrated ability to decide in favor of the commons, then no. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A LIBERTARIAN? Probably.Although I have come to understand that we use various terms for “Liberty”: Sovereignty for the martial class, Liberty for the middle class, Freedom for the labor class, and “Positive Freedom” (charity) for the underclasses. And that all of us mean something quite different by it. As such “Liberty” is a middle class ambition, and I do not consider myself first a member of the middle class, but of the lower (martial) aristocracy. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF ALT-RIGHT?No. I consider myself New Right. Alt right is a resistance movement not a revolutionary one. Complaints not solutions. I do solutions. DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A WHITE NATIONALIST?No. I take the position that familism, tribalism, nationalism, under natural law will produce the best outcomes for each family, tribe, nation, and race. And as such all can transcend the animal we call man.
DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF A NATIONAL SOCIALIST? No. Although I do feel that despite its terrible economics that it was one of the greatest and most beautiful ambitions ever created by man – until they adopted propaganda, pseudoscience, and outright lying. WHAT DO YOU CONSIDER YOURSELF? I consider myself Sovereign: An advocate for Aristocracy. Or what we might call a “Conservative Libertarian”. Even if that label tells us almost nothing useful.