(On Discord)
Guy asks me if I believe private property emerges. I say, well, it emerges in concert with the complexity of cooperation. I say that by and large we created markets and property by suppression of parasitism. By suppressing parasitism we created markets. ….
Then he jumps in and makes a completely unrelated argument (rant) about the production of commons. And that ‘states’ are necessary for those productions. And of course he brings up health care, roads, pyramids….
And I’m thinking. Um. You know, you just cut from bottom up construction to top down justification as if that’s a falsification. When we never got to the point in the bottom up construction.
I mean…. jeez.
morons,
Form: Reply
-
(On Discord) Guy asks me if I believe private property emerges. I say, well, it
(On Discord) Guy asks me if I believe private property emerges. I say, well, it emerges in concert with the complexity of cooperation. I say that by and large we created markets and property by suppression of parasitism. By suppressing parasitism we created markets. …. Then he jumps in and makes a completely unrelated argument (rant) about the production of commons. And that ‘states’ are necessary for those productions. And of course he brings up health care, roads, pyramids…. And I’m thinking. Um. You know, you just cut from bottom up construction to top down justification as if that’s a falsification. When we never got to the point in the bottom up construction. I mean…. jeez. morons, -
(On Discord) Guy asks me if I believe private property emerges. I say, well, it
(On Discord)
Guy asks me if I believe private property emerges. I say, well, it emerges in concert with the complexity of cooperation. I say that by and large we created markets and property by suppression of parasitism. By suppressing parasitism we created markets. ….
Then he jumps in and makes a completely unrelated argument (rant) about the production of commons. And that ‘states’ are necessary for those productions. And of course he brings up health care, roads, pyramids….
And I’m thinking. Um. You know, you just cut from bottom up construction to top down justification as if that’s a falsification. When we never got to the point in the bottom up construction.
I mean…. jeez.
morons,
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-11 13:29:00 UTC
-
“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend It makes y
—“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend It makes you a female with autism. Just as it makes a male with psychosis just a male with psychosis. When I say (or Baron Cohen says), Female Psychotic or Solipsistic vs Male Aspergers or Autistic, we are only saying that the distribution of brain structures from the conflationary fast growth, to the deflationary slow growth, tend to be distributed in what we consider ‘normal’ individuals, by gender. We associate these brain structures with the dominant distribution of those brain structures. For example, homosexuality, at least in males is most likely an in utero developmental defect. For women, they are always more ‘fungible’ with regard to sexuality. But ‘butch’ lesbians are fairly identifiable as having more masculine personalities. Two say that there are only two genders is true. To say that there are wide distributions of gender traits is something else. To say that gender norms are determined by both genetic, in utero, developmental, habituation (circumstantial demand, or training), or mental illness (developmental failure) is simply obvious. I love being an aspie with other aspies. I love being a normie with normies. I prefer to be with both. The primary problem for aspies is finding each other so that we can develop relationshipos. And then finding women we can mate with and reproduce. Thankfully we have internet and internet dating. -
“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend It makes y
—“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend It makes you a female with autism. Just as it makes a male with psychosis just a male with psychosis. When I say (or Baron Cohen says), Female Psychotic or Solipsistic vs Male Aspergers or Autistic, we are only saying that the distribution of brain structures from the conflationary fast growth, to the deflationary slow growth, tend to be distributed in what we consider ‘normal’ individuals, by gender. We associate these brain structures with the dominant distribution of those brain structures. For example, homosexuality, at least in males is most likely an in utero developmental defect. For women, they are always more ‘fungible’ with regard to sexuality. But ‘butch’ lesbians are fairly identifiable as having more masculine personalities. Two say that there are only two genders is true. To say that there are wide distributions of gender traits is something else. To say that gender norms are determined by both genetic, in utero, developmental, habituation (circumstantial demand, or training), or mental illness (developmental failure) is simply obvious. I love being an aspie with other aspies. I love being a normie with normies. I prefer to be with both. The primary problem for aspies is finding each other so that we can develop relationshipos. And then finding women we can mate with and reproduce. Thankfully we have internet and internet dating. -
“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend It makes y
—“Curt, I’m a female with autism, what does that make me?”— A Friend
It makes you a female with autism. Just as it makes a male with psychosis just a male with psychosis.
When I say (or Baron Cohen says), Female Psychotic or Solipsistic vs Male Aspergers or Autistic, we are only saying that the distribution of brain structures from the conflationary fast growth, to the deflationary slow growth, tend to be distributed in what we consider ‘normal’ individuals, by gender. We associate these brain structures with the dominant distribution of those brain structures.
For example, homosexuality, at least in males is most likely an in utero developmental defect. For women, they are always more ‘fungible’ with regard to sexuality. But ‘butch’ lesbians are fairly identifiable as having more masculine personalities.
Two say that there are only two genders is true. To say that there are wide distributions of gender traits is something else. To say that gender norms are determined by both genetic, in utero, developmental, habituation (circumstantial demand, or training), or mental illness (developmental failure) is simply obvious.
I love being an aspie with other aspies. I love being a normie with normies. I prefer to be with both. The primary problem for aspies is finding each other so that we can develop relationshipos. And then finding women we can mate with and reproduce.
Thankfully we have internet and internet dating.
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-07 10:14:00 UTC
-
Ricky. You need to get healthy and stay healthy so that you can use your talents
Ricky. You need to get healthy and stay healthy so that you can use your talents without being held back. I’m not goin’ anywhere. OK? 😉
Source date (UTC): 2017-11-04 17:38:06 UTC
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/926866154429276161
Reply addressees: @eruditenights
Replying to: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/925191443089461248
IN REPLY TO:
@eruditenights
@curtdoolittle You’re the key to the future anyways, gotta win over your favor; a pass from you could just do it; forget the writing…
Original post: https://twitter.com/i/web/status/925191443089461248
-
I just realized that I hadn’t seen anything from you on my wall in probably over
I just realized that I hadn’t seen anything from you on my wall in probably over a month. I interacted with a bunch of posts so maybe the fb algorithm thinks I like you again -
I just realized that I hadn’t seen anything from you on my wall in probably over
I just realized that I hadn’t seen anything from you on my wall in probably over a month. I interacted with a bunch of posts so maybe the fb algorithm thinks I like you again -
On Self Ownership
–“Self ownership cannot exist because ownership requires reciprocity.”— by Bill Joslin: What about possession? Context: In fact : Possession – what you can defend is yours Agreement : Property– what others agree is yours is yours Legal : 3rd party insurance of ownership agreement In fact : (de facto) soverienty – hold monopoly of violence over a domain Agreement (De jur): recognition of soverienty by other soveriegns (example Israel) Legal – (and currently non-existent) 3rd party ensurance of agreement of soverienty (no world power to enforce) The notion of possessing the volition of another can not exist ‘in fact’ only in agreement. (a slave agrees to be a slave when given this choice: “be a slave or die”) In other words ownership of a human can not be demonstrated ‘in fact’, only in agreement and in law. The simple act of raising one’s arm or scratching one’s ass demonstrates possession of volition which, in fact, can only be the person doing the scratching. The only type of human ownership which remains coherent across all three domains (physical – in fact, social-agreement, legal-3rd party ensurance) is self ownership were by we agree to self ownership (ownership coheres to possession) and the law ensures it. Any other form of human ownership can only cohere to 2 of the 3 (agreement and law) To clarify further. Human volition remains bound by biology and thus can not be transferred, in fact, to another. One human’s volition bent to the will of another can only occur via agreement between the slave and master. The slave always retains possession and control. So the quote follows the same structure as libertarian arguments which rally for liberty while ignoring the physical necessity of soverienty for liberty’s existence. Liberty can only exist in agreement with the soveriegn and law by the soveriegn. Human ownership can only exist in agreement with the slave bolstered by the law of the masters. Just as libertarians seek liberty while avoiding the costs of soverienty, this argument seeks slavery without the requirement of reciprocity (slave’s agreement). I can only think of one reason to promote the idea – the wish to justify coercion.”—