Mar 19, 2020, 3:36 PM You can appropriate language, philosophy, and theology for your purposes, in order to justify your priors. Sure. You can’t steal the LAWS to justify your priors. Sorry. That’s the whole point of laws. THERE ARE THREE QUESTIONS THAT DECIDE ALL PHILOSOPHY 1 – CHOICE: “Why should I not suicide?” 2 – ETHICS: “Why should I not kill you and take your stuff?” 3 – POLITICS: “Why should we not kill you and take your stuff?” The only answer is “If the proceeds from cooperation past present and future are more valuable than not. Otherwise predation, parasitism or avoidance are preferable to cooperation.” THERE ARE THREE LAWS THAT DECIDE ALL CONFLICTS UNDER THE ANSWER TO THAT PHILOSOPHY 1 – The Physical Laws of Nature 2 – The Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity 3 – The Evolutionary Law of Transcendence. All questions are decidable by those three sets of laws. THAT IS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL PHILOSOPHY. Really. That’s all there is.
Form: Short Note
-
The Foundation of All Philosophy
Mar 19, 2020, 3:36 PM You can appropriate language, philosophy, and theology for your purposes, in order to justify your priors. Sure. You can’t steal the LAWS to justify your priors. Sorry. That’s the whole point of laws. THERE ARE THREE QUESTIONS THAT DECIDE ALL PHILOSOPHY 1 – CHOICE: “Why should I not suicide?” 2 – ETHICS: “Why should I not kill you and take your stuff?” 3 – POLITICS: “Why should we not kill you and take your stuff?” The only answer is “If the proceeds from cooperation past present and future are more valuable than not. Otherwise predation, parasitism or avoidance are preferable to cooperation.” THERE ARE THREE LAWS THAT DECIDE ALL CONFLICTS UNDER THE ANSWER TO THAT PHILOSOPHY 1 – The Physical Laws of Nature 2 – The Natural Law of Sovereignty and Reciprocity 3 – The Evolutionary Law of Transcendence. All questions are decidable by those three sets of laws. THAT IS THE FOUNDATION OF ALL PHILOSOPHY. Really. That’s all there is.
-
Why Women Got the Vote
Mar 20, 2020, 11:24 AM Women got the vote because they were entering the workforce during the war; out of a feeling of moral gratitude for their having done so; and the government wanted to tax them, and the reason for the american revolution was ‘no taxation without representation’. In addition, they wanted to reduce the conflict postwar. women weren’t happy just ‘going home’ now that they could find work. Men wanted them to go home so that they could have their jobs bad. The politicians found women were more pliable (open to political manipulation) and so both parties cooperated on the integration of women. That’s the reason. There is nothing more complicated than that. War, labor shortage, women filled the shortage, tax revenues could be increased by women working at the cost of number of children. The only mistake was not giving women a separate house. This wasn’t such a big problem until the pill. The pill and jewish anti-male feminism were concerted efforts by the jewish socialists to undermine the family institution so that women could be used to undermine men. This is all well covered in the literature. Everyone knew what was going on. But it was regarded as a conspiracy theory. It was, but it was true.
-
Train the Elephant – All the Way
Mar 20, 2020, 11:33 AM The more agency the have the less intuition to rely on to choose, the more you rely on intuition to falsify. I think that’s the net of it. “What does my intuition say? Ok. how can that be false? What’s the evidence that falsifies my intuition? And repeat that endlessly.” I mean, I know that’s how I think. Free association, falsification, loop until I have a first principle. Normal human reaction is just to seek a response from intuition. You have to train the elephant.
—“It’s like an OODA loop for combat with the self.”—Kris Rue
-
Train the Elephant – All the Way
Mar 20, 2020, 11:33 AM The more agency the have the less intuition to rely on to choose, the more you rely on intuition to falsify. I think that’s the net of it. “What does my intuition say? Ok. how can that be false? What’s the evidence that falsifies my intuition? And repeat that endlessly.” I mean, I know that’s how I think. Free association, falsification, loop until I have a first principle. Normal human reaction is just to seek a response from intuition. You have to train the elephant.
—“It’s like an OODA loop for combat with the self.”—Kris Rue
-
I’m Gonna Get My Revolution? Goldman: -24% Gdp.
Mar 20, 2020, 11:49 AM Goldman Sachs has a devastating revision for its GDP growth predictions theweek.com Clockwork. If you understand cycles… Anyway. The chief contribution of the postwar german austrians was the business cycle. ’08 ended the debate. Austrians are fully integrated into mainstream economic theory. No, I didn’t predict that the clock would strike midnight because of a virus. I predicted it would be a normal cycle collapse. I wish I had my diagrams from 2004. They were in red pen on copy paper. I hung them on the wall behind my desk. Learn generational cycles. Learn Demographics. Learn class and cultural differences. Learn technological cycles. Learn business cycles. Learn Hayekian Triangles. Learn enough different industries so that you understand their means of production. There is as much denial of human differences in politics as there is in education – but human differences eventually express in economics politics culture and civilizational ascent or decline. I built and ran consulting companies. Consulting companies are intelligence organizations. When you know a company’s technology you know how to OPERATIONALIZE that business. you learn a hundred businesses a year or more. I have been operationalizing businesses since I walked out of college. And I wrote simulation games and AI in my spare time, and studied economics. The patterns are always the same. You can play the market and profit from asymmetric information amongst noise or you can ignore the market and watch the economy and the polity and the culture – BECAUSE YOU ARE MEASURING CAPITAL not income. And that is what I do differently from other economists. I only look at changes in the balance sheet, and income is just noise. If we get anywhere near the -20% we will have our revolution. LIKE CLOCKWORK.
-
I’m Gonna Get My Revolution? Goldman: -24% Gdp.
Mar 20, 2020, 11:49 AM Goldman Sachs has a devastating revision for its GDP growth predictions theweek.com Clockwork. If you understand cycles… Anyway. The chief contribution of the postwar german austrians was the business cycle. ’08 ended the debate. Austrians are fully integrated into mainstream economic theory. No, I didn’t predict that the clock would strike midnight because of a virus. I predicted it would be a normal cycle collapse. I wish I had my diagrams from 2004. They were in red pen on copy paper. I hung them on the wall behind my desk. Learn generational cycles. Learn Demographics. Learn class and cultural differences. Learn technological cycles. Learn business cycles. Learn Hayekian Triangles. Learn enough different industries so that you understand their means of production. There is as much denial of human differences in politics as there is in education – but human differences eventually express in economics politics culture and civilizational ascent or decline. I built and ran consulting companies. Consulting companies are intelligence organizations. When you know a company’s technology you know how to OPERATIONALIZE that business. you learn a hundred businesses a year or more. I have been operationalizing businesses since I walked out of college. And I wrote simulation games and AI in my spare time, and studied economics. The patterns are always the same. You can play the market and profit from asymmetric information amongst noise or you can ignore the market and watch the economy and the polity and the culture – BECAUSE YOU ARE MEASURING CAPITAL not income. And that is what I do differently from other economists. I only look at changes in the balance sheet, and income is just noise. If we get anywhere near the -20% we will have our revolution. LIKE CLOCKWORK.
-
Teach Applied P Not P-Method
Mar 20, 2020, 12:19 PM by Luke Weinhagen
—“Then why are people so overwhelmed by P so often?”—
Teaching people how to replicate P methodology and to produce P output is complex. (discovered-P/constructed-P) Teaching people how to consume P output is simple. (applied-P) We say to people “we have the answer” then they ask “Ok, what is it?” and we start teaching them how to construct P. But this is not the answer is it? This is how to find the answer – and we advertised that we already had the answer. So those seeking the answer get overwhelmed by lessons in methodology they never sought. How can they not be confused and overwhelmed? In offering the methodology in response to “What is the answer?” we create the perception that the only way to access the answer is to construct it yourself. It is the teachers curse. We value the “how” and the “why” and project that value onto anyone asking the “what”. We are conflating production and output. I think John’s success, and the success we are seeing ITV have, are at least in part because they de-conflate production and output and offer their audiences a consumable framing of output. (this is not a dumbing down, it is giving the market what it is specifically asking for – the answer). (CD: This was helpful. thanks)
-
Teach Applied P Not P-Method
Mar 20, 2020, 12:19 PM by Luke Weinhagen
—“Then why are people so overwhelmed by P so often?”—
Teaching people how to replicate P methodology and to produce P output is complex. (discovered-P/constructed-P) Teaching people how to consume P output is simple. (applied-P) We say to people “we have the answer” then they ask “Ok, what is it?” and we start teaching them how to construct P. But this is not the answer is it? This is how to find the answer – and we advertised that we already had the answer. So those seeking the answer get overwhelmed by lessons in methodology they never sought. How can they not be confused and overwhelmed? In offering the methodology in response to “What is the answer?” we create the perception that the only way to access the answer is to construct it yourself. It is the teachers curse. We value the “how” and the “why” and project that value onto anyone asking the “what”. We are conflating production and output. I think John’s success, and the success we are seeing ITV have, are at least in part because they de-conflate production and output and offer their audiences a consumable framing of output. (this is not a dumbing down, it is giving the market what it is specifically asking for – the answer). (CD: This was helpful. thanks)
-
This is the story of history – not economics.
Mar 20, 2020, 12:52 PM
The good generated by a middle class, the demand for expansion of the middle class, always and everywhere expands until the capital is consumed by the middle class by expanding the lower classes, leading to dysgenia, decline, and collapse.
This is the story of history – not economics.