Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • OK. (FRUSTRATED) I’M GOING TO DOUBLE DOWN ON ATTACKING SELF DECEPTION

    OK. (FRUSTRATED) I’M GOING TO DOUBLE DOWN ON ATTACKING SELF DECEPTION.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 20:42:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.bbc.com/news/health-40719743

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 20:17:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 19:49:00 UTC

  • THE PAIN OF UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS You know guys, once you take upon yourself the

    THE PAIN OF UNCOMFORTABLE TRUTHS

    You know guys, once you take upon yourself the mission to exterminate falsehood as a means of saving your people and their genome from deception, and then preserving western civilization, with our deflationary truth, high trust and high velocity adaptation, you’re going to have to watch many of your favorite sacred cows die.

    How did Bacon, Copernicus and Newton feel? How did Darwin and Maxwell feel?

    Just because you value something profoundly does not mean it is not harmful to you and your people.

    Man up, so to speak.

    You were not right about anything except the value of western civilization. You were just a little less wrong than everyone else that had been deceived.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 15:06:00 UTC

  • RESEARCH: PRIEST VS GLADIATOR At one point I would have agreed with Adam Smith,

    RESEARCH: PRIEST VS GLADIATOR

    At one point I would have agreed with Adam Smith, because I believed research could be performed by slow individual contemplation of the written word, by the individual, at human scale – scientific research was therefore akin to scriptural study.

    But like Popper, I have come to understand that once we passed the scale of research that was possible in achievable human time frames, achievable by individuals, and instead required a MARKET in which we contributed to research in parallel, I understood that one might say he has a theory and does NOT state it is true, but instead, asks for criticism, so that together with others in the market for truth, we contribute confirmation, criticism, and additional information, and together, iteratively improve the theory.

    So smith argues as a priest, and I advocate arguing as a gladiator: I claim the top of the hill, and seek a man better than I to fell me. For I wish only to be led by better men. And the only test of superiority is defeat in a test that exists in the real world (operational language).

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 09:01:00 UTC

  • the reason they liked duels was because it stopped impassioned ‘fights in the mo

    the reason they liked duels was because it stopped impassioned ‘fights in the moment’, in an era where everyone always had at least a knife and often was physically strong as only farmers are, while agreeing to fight and preserving ‘face’ – but then allowing time for cooler heads to prevail, and apologies to be issued. The material problem with the duel was the use of champions (professionals), and then using ‘constructed’ challenges to commit no better than murder by the use of champions. It was and remains, easy to fix.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 07:25:00 UTC

  • I had a friend whose philosophy was very similar to christian science. Although,

    I had a friend whose philosophy was very similar to christian science. Although, as he practiced it: a disciplined mind, and a disciplined body, it was a well done art, not an excuse to avoid the physician and hospital. But I would not enter into that discussion with him. Ever. And he would not bridge it with me. He did not know he was a stoic. And that is what he’d sought.

    Most men do not know that what they seek is a personal philosophy of stoicism, a political philosophy of soveriegnty, and transcendent philosophy of heroic literature.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-25 06:26:00 UTC

  • Until we free ourselves of Abrahamism, we will be defeatable by Abrahamism. We h

    Until we free ourselves of Abrahamism, we will be defeatable by Abrahamism. We have been defeated once. We are in the process of being defeated a second time. We will only be resistant to defeat if we ourselves are not vulnerable to it. The chinese are not vulnerable. They have been right all along. We want to rule others. It’s profitable. But undomesticated human animals are impossible to rule. We must be content with ruling ourselves.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-24 17:09:00 UTC

  • I would like to see the academy drop political ‘science’, sociology, philosophy,

    I would like to see the academy drop political ‘science’, sociology, philosophy, literature, history, and anything else that does not have a method of testing internal consistency and external correspondence by some sort of calculation whether quantitative, or algorithmic, or by triangulation. Including a ban on the use of students for any form of study whatsoever, and any behavioral test of less than 1000 people. In other words, if you can’t raise enough money to produce a self-falsifying study then you need to find another career.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-24 13:22:00 UTC

  • So in my perspective Religion is an anti market education system and taught chea

    So in my perspective Religion is an anti market education system and taught cheaply to people who do not have market influences to shape their ethics, and Education as we understand it evolved to Transition people into market ethics so that they would succeed and understand market ethics (meritocracy), and how they differ from subsistence ethics (equality). And that this separation was rational given that it is very cheap to teach people by lying and allegory and equality, and it is more expensive to teach people by history and calculation, and meritocracy.

    The problem being that none of us are subsistence farmers, and all of us live in the market and have no other choice any longer to return to the fields. The territorial value of the individually farmable earth was maximized long ago.

    So as far as I understand it religion is just a cheap way to enslave people by teaching them sufficient information to survive as agrarians and pastoralists but not enough information, nor the right information, to survive in a market society where we cannot judge our actions by whether they are equal to that of others, but by whether they facilitate exchange with others to whom we are increasingly and eternally unequal.

    Source date (UTC): 2017-07-24 06:34:00 UTC