(important) [T]he signature property (the ‘tell’) of continental argument is conflation, in which the purpose of argument is an attempt to construct authority. (German and French) Signature property (the ‘tell’) of cosmopolitan thought is ‘the prestige’ (distraction), in which the purpose of an argument is to distract from the central, more obvious one by means of cunning. (Jewish). The signature property (the ‘tell’) of anglo enlightenment thought is the assumption of universalism. These three ‘tells’ are all means of deception and error in order to justify the metaphysical assumption about what is ‘good’.
Form: Short Note
-
The ‘Tells’ Of Continental, Cosmopolitan And Enlightenment Arguments
(important) [T]he signature property (the ‘tell’) of continental argument is conflation, in which the purpose of argument is an attempt to construct authority. (German and French) Signature property (the ‘tell’) of cosmopolitan thought is ‘the prestige’ (distraction), in which the purpose of an argument is to distract from the central, more obvious one by means of cunning. (Jewish). The signature property (the ‘tell’) of anglo enlightenment thought is the assumption of universalism. These three ‘tells’ are all means of deception and error in order to justify the metaphysical assumption about what is ‘good’.
-
The 'Tells' Of Continental, Cosmopolitan And Enlightenment Arguments
(important) [T]he signature property (the ‘tell’) of continental argument is conflation, in which the purpose of argument is an attempt to construct authority. (German and French) Signature property (the ‘tell’) of cosmopolitan thought is ‘the prestige’ (distraction), in which the purpose of an argument is to distract from the central, more obvious one by means of cunning. (Jewish). The signature property (the ‘tell’) of anglo enlightenment thought is the assumption of universalism. These three ‘tells’ are all means of deception and error in order to justify the metaphysical assumption about what is ‘good’.
-
The ‘Tells’ Of Continental, Cosmopolitan And Enlightenment Arguments
(important) [T]he signature property (the ‘tell’) of continental argument is conflation, in which the purpose of argument is an attempt to construct authority. (German and French) Signature property (the ‘tell’) of cosmopolitan thought is ‘the prestige’ (distraction), in which the purpose of an argument is to distract from the central, more obvious one by means of cunning. (Jewish). The signature property (the ‘tell’) of anglo enlightenment thought is the assumption of universalism. These three ‘tells’ are all means of deception and error in order to justify the metaphysical assumption about what is ‘good’.
-
The Attestation Theory Of Truth
[I] supposed I should state this clearly, and probably write a little history of Truth in order to get across why we tend to use Platonic truth. But I’ll have to get to that in my chapter on Truth. If we require, as does science, that we reduce all statements to operational language, then what action are we describing when we use the term ‘Truth”? We are using its original meaning as “as true as possible given the best of my abilities”. All other truths are platonist. Described as human action, ‘Truth’ can only describe attestation because it is only such attestation that can be brought into observable existence. This solves the long standing problem of the hierarchy of truth. Cheers.
-
The Attestation Theory Of Truth
[I] supposed I should state this clearly, and probably write a little history of Truth in order to get across why we tend to use Platonic truth. But I’ll have to get to that in my chapter on Truth. If we require, as does science, that we reduce all statements to operational language, then what action are we describing when we use the term ‘Truth”? We are using its original meaning as “as true as possible given the best of my abilities”. All other truths are platonist. Described as human action, ‘Truth’ can only describe attestation because it is only such attestation that can be brought into observable existence. This solves the long standing problem of the hierarchy of truth. Cheers.
-
The End Of Moral Intuitionism And The Rise Of Moral Realism
(meaningful) [M]ost philosophical debate degenerates to a recursive discourse on norms. That’s because human beings really enjoy the ease of introspection, and the self reinforcing reward of moral intuitionism. But if Propertarianism is correct, and I am pretty certain that it is, then moral truths can be expressed as purely rational arguments, and introspection merely tells you about your own reproductive strategy, class strategy, culture strategy, and cognitive biases. That means an end to moral intuitionism. Propertarianism allows us to produce a formal logic of ethics and morality, that denies us our cognitive biases and rational limitations. And that is why we need formal logics.
-
The End Of Moral Intuitionism And The Rise Of Moral Realism
(meaningful) [M]ost philosophical debate degenerates to a recursive discourse on norms. That’s because human beings really enjoy the ease of introspection, and the self reinforcing reward of moral intuitionism. But if Propertarianism is correct, and I am pretty certain that it is, then moral truths can be expressed as purely rational arguments, and introspection merely tells you about your own reproductive strategy, class strategy, culture strategy, and cognitive biases. That means an end to moral intuitionism. Propertarianism allows us to produce a formal logic of ethics and morality, that denies us our cognitive biases and rational limitations. And that is why we need formal logics.
-
Rothbard As Destroyer Of Liberty?
[S]o is liberty defined by voluntary exchange? Or is liberty defined by suppressing all in-group involuntary transfer? I’ll help you: it’s the latter. Just like the Golden and Silver Rules, these two propositions lead to vastly different conclusions and their application leads to vastly different societies. The gnostics were right about ‘Jehova’ and I’m right about ‘Rothbardianism’. You couldn’t invent a better way to destroy liberty than a pseudoscience that encouraged passionate devotion to a false theory as a distraction from a scientific answer to a true theory. “You oughtta’ think on that a bit” before you repeat one more rothbardian falsehood as a prayer for liberty. Rothbardian ethics are immoral and parasitic, and the NAP is immoral, unethical and socially destructive. If there is a hell, Jehova is laughing at you every time you quote the NAP.
-
Rothbard As Destroyer Of Liberty?
[S]o is liberty defined by voluntary exchange? Or is liberty defined by suppressing all in-group involuntary transfer? I’ll help you: it’s the latter. Just like the Golden and Silver Rules, these two propositions lead to vastly different conclusions and their application leads to vastly different societies. The gnostics were right about ‘Jehova’ and I’m right about ‘Rothbardianism’. You couldn’t invent a better way to destroy liberty than a pseudoscience that encouraged passionate devotion to a false theory as a distraction from a scientific answer to a true theory. “You oughtta’ think on that a bit” before you repeat one more rothbardian falsehood as a prayer for liberty. Rothbardian ethics are immoral and parasitic, and the NAP is immoral, unethical and socially destructive. If there is a hell, Jehova is laughing at you every time you quote the NAP.