Curt Doolittle

Form: Short Note

  • VARIATIONS ON TRUTH (very much worth repeating) Truth and Adherence to Rules are

    http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2014/07/11/cultural-variants-of-truth-and-the-consequences/CULTURAL VARIATIONS ON TRUTH

    (very much worth repeating)

    Truth and Adherence to Rules are two different things. (submission)

    Truth and Fidelity to Contract are two different things.

    Truth and Duty are two different things.

    Truth and Knowledge are two different things.

    Truth as Adherence – Familialism (most of the world)

    Truth as Fidelity – Tribalism (judaism)

    Truth as Duty – Nationalism (germans)

    Truth as Science – Universalism. (english)

    The principle of truth to to an Adherence community consists of order. The principle of ‘truth’ to a contract community consists of fidelity. The principle of truth to a truth-telling community consists of ***SCIENCE***

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-05 06:06:00 UTC

  • Writing user documentation is so much better than marketing material. lol

    Writing user documentation is so much better than marketing material. lol.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-04 15:36:00 UTC

  • TRUE VS MORAL Debating whether something is true or not, is very different from

    TRUE VS MORAL

    Debating whether something is true or not, is very different from debating whether it is moral or not. We too often allow our culture’s framing of discourse as truth, to be used as a vehicle for advocating immorality.

    This is why the ‘others’ cannot debate me. I will not fall into the question of whether something is true or not. We can rarely know if answers to great questions are true or not.

    We can however know whether the answers to great questions are moral or not.

    They are immoral. We are not.

    MORAL AND ETHICAL:

    Productive

    Fully informed

    Warrantied

    Voluntary Transfer

    Limited to externality of the same.

    TRUTHFUL TESTIMONY

    Warranties of Due Diligence:

    – categorical consistency (non-conflation)

    – Internal consistency (logical)

    – external correspondence (empirical consistency)

    – existential consistency (operational definitions)

    – full accounting ( against selection bias )

    – parsimony and limits ( precision )

    – morality – ( natural law of cooperation) consisting of productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary transfer, limited to externalities of the same criteria.)

    Because having performed these due diligences, it is extremely difficult to engage in error, bias, wishful thinking, loading-framing-overloading-suggestion, and deceit.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-04 13:36:00 UTC

  • Ukrainian children are right up there with puppies and kittens. OMG. So cute

    Ukrainian children are right up there with puppies and kittens. OMG. So cute.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-04 09:43:00 UTC

  • How would I teach a philosophy course? Hmm… Well, you know, I would have to te

    How would I teach a philosophy course? Hmm… Well, you know, I would have to teach it as truth first, and then the catalog of errors and deceptions that constitute most of intellectual history.

    I can’t imagine that’s attractive to a philosophy department.

    lol

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-03 17:58:00 UTC

  • NW White vs NE Asian delta. 1) Cranial size. 2) Distribution width. 3) Verbal vs

    NW White vs NE Asian delta.

    1) Cranial size.

    2) Distribution width.

    3) Verbal vs abstract

    4) Sexual maturity.

    Their average is better

    Our best are better.

    North Sea White vs Han/Korean/Japanese

    Basically you want a big round head, limited sexual maturity, and as much verbal intelligence as you can get, followed by as much analytic intelligence as you can get.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-02-02 05:35:00 UTC

  • The 19th Century Thinkers Were So Close…

    [S]pencer and Darwin were so close. Unfortunately mises, popper, hayek, brouwer, bridgman, and poincare failed to carry them across the threshold. Why? Because the combination of women, marx, boaz, freud, created a sentimental alternative to truth – a great lie. And after the great war, keynes created a way to use consumption to recover from it, and the promise of something new to mask the regret of the catastrophe. In other words, we replaced art, heroism, and truth, with crass consumption and, proletarianism to hold the state together, an innumerate pseudoscience to systematize it, and postmodern lies to defend it all. I understand that we must produce a synthesis of truth and religion. This is the hardest objective to solve. Principally because men need costly rituals in order to defend the principles that they attest to. I understand how the previous century failed. I understand why the great lies succeeded in the post war era, for the same reason that christianity succeeded in the post-war and post-plaque era. I think I understand how to create that religion, philosophy, logic, and science. Please god give me strength, energy, time, and resources to do it.

  • The 19th Century Thinkers Were So Close…

    [S]pencer and Darwin were so close. Unfortunately mises, popper, hayek, brouwer, bridgman, and poincare failed to carry them across the threshold. Why? Because the combination of women, marx, boaz, freud, created a sentimental alternative to truth – a great lie. And after the great war, keynes created a way to use consumption to recover from it, and the promise of something new to mask the regret of the catastrophe. In other words, we replaced art, heroism, and truth, with crass consumption and, proletarianism to hold the state together, an innumerate pseudoscience to systematize it, and postmodern lies to defend it all. I understand that we must produce a synthesis of truth and religion. This is the hardest objective to solve. Principally because men need costly rituals in order to defend the principles that they attest to. I understand how the previous century failed. I understand why the great lies succeeded in the post war era, for the same reason that christianity succeeded in the post-war and post-plaque era. I think I understand how to create that religion, philosophy, logic, and science. Please god give me strength, energy, time, and resources to do it.

  • “Your Audacity Impresses and Amuses Me”

    —“Your audacity impresses and amuses me.”–

    [G]iven that I’m outside of the academy, I am both too stupid to know that it cannot be done, and unregulated by academics who would prevent me from trying such an absurd thing. So I try in ignorance to achieve the unachievable. Now that I’ve gone through most of intellectual history, it seems that this same stupidity is common among the philosophers. Smith, Kant, Hume, Darwin, Spencer and Mises, Popper and Hayek all did the same. It appears that the academy is not a producer of great ideas, but a deterrent to them. Scarily enough it seems like I’ve made more progress than the others. For the simple reason that programming teaches you how to think a certain way. And that certain way is how we must construct laws: so that they are calculable not merely ‘reasonable’. I have no aires to protect like academics and politicians. I do not need money from book sales. I don’t care about the accolades of scholars. I’m just a lone lunatic slaving away at an impossible task, and out of dumb luck and circumstance have discovered the solution to the problem of the social sciences. We are subjects of our time. That is all.

  • “Your Audacity Impresses and Amuses Me”

    —“Your audacity impresses and amuses me.”–

    [G]iven that I’m outside of the academy, I am both too stupid to know that it cannot be done, and unregulated by academics who would prevent me from trying such an absurd thing. So I try in ignorance to achieve the unachievable. Now that I’ve gone through most of intellectual history, it seems that this same stupidity is common among the philosophers. Smith, Kant, Hume, Darwin, Spencer and Mises, Popper and Hayek all did the same. It appears that the academy is not a producer of great ideas, but a deterrent to them. Scarily enough it seems like I’ve made more progress than the others. For the simple reason that programming teaches you how to think a certain way. And that certain way is how we must construct laws: so that they are calculable not merely ‘reasonable’. I have no aires to protect like academics and politicians. I do not need money from book sales. I don’t care about the accolades of scholars. I’m just a lone lunatic slaving away at an impossible task, and out of dumb luck and circumstance have discovered the solution to the problem of the social sciences. We are subjects of our time. That is all.