Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • MY WORK ON CHRISTIANITY I work under the principle that the laws of nature, the

    MY WORK ON CHRISTIANITY

    I work under the principle that the laws of nature, the natural law of man, and the evolutionary necessity of the law of transcendence are the same whether we state them in Theological, Philosophical, and Scientific language. So whether you intuit, think, and speak in the Christian, Deist, or Naturalist language, and whether you choose to adhere to physical laws, the natural law of man, and the necessity of evolutionary laws out of faith, reason, or science, is irrelevant to the individual or to the polity, or to mankind unless you selfishly demand the rest of the world conform to your way of thinking, speaking. On the other hand, if you do not live in accordance with the physical, natural, and evolutionary then you work against yourself, your polity, your people, and mankind – and when you do so, you work against the Christian God, the deist god, or the condition of our people past present and future.

    In my work, to defend against the enemies of physical, natural, and evolutionary laws, I must put these laws in a constitution in the language of the law, and science is the language of the law. Because we need people to think across the spectrum of intuitive, rational, and empirical thought so that we can solve intuitive, rational, and empirical questions, for intuitive, rational, and empirical minds. And we cannot demand people intuit, think, and speak in exclusively intuitive, rational, or empirical language. All we can do is demand that people behave according to physical, natural, and evolutionary laws. We cannot force people to have faith, reason, or the burden of the sciences, nor to abandon faith, reason, and the utility of the sciences. We can only write the law such that those who ACT contrary to the laws of nature, of man, and of evolutionary transcendence, can be prosecuted by the law, in the language of the law, if they transgress. Because the law consists only of the means of resolving disputes over action – not of intuition, feeling, or thought.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:54:00 UTC

  • REASON FOR CHRISTIAN AGITATION Over the past few years I have worked very hard o

    REASON FOR CHRISTIAN AGITATION

    Over the past few years I have worked very hard on comparative religion, and have come to understand why we desire it and how it fulfills those desires by a spectrum of means from the rational to the emotional.

    I was trying to solve a number of problems:

    1. The means by which judaism, christianity, and islam are taught and argued are the same means by which marxism, socialism, postmodernism, feminism, and the denial of the nature of mankind are taught and argued. So I was searching for a legal means to prevent the use of this method of teaching and arguing while preserving the good of christianity. This resulted in the same answer Thomas Jefferson came to when he compiled The Jefferson Bible. This Jefferson bible presents us with a Jesus who is ‘pure’ and free of dogma. And I discovered that while this is possible it is not tolerable. And because it is not tolerable it is impossible.

    I care only about the generations of our european religions. Including prehistoric natural, ancient heroic, and medieval Christian. And I care about preserving all three generations of them because of one of our unspoken secrets: european tripartism and trifunctionalism. When christians use this method of teaching and arguing against me or my work it makes me very angry – because I understand that this method is the means by which our civilization has been destroyed by the postwar jewish movement against western civlization. And I this threat is very real, very serious, and we are almost lost.

    So between my investigation into how to eliminate the abrahamic method of teaching and arguing, and between my frustration with the frequent use of this method by christians who were agitated by my investigation, I created a great deal of friction between the faithful, philosophical, and empirical Christians.

    2. I want to outlaw false religions that seek to destroy christianity, our philosophy, our science, our law, our civilization and our people. In particular, neigher Judaism nor Islam are religions – they are means of warfare from within masquerading as a religion. Early Christianity was likewise a means of warfare from within – we merley managed to ‘civilize it’ over the centuries after it was introduced to europe.

    3. I want to restore the religion to its political competition to the state, and restore its responsibility for birth, age of maturity, marriage, family and – at least – early education, and death. The state has proven too fashionable and religion’s value is in defense against the fashions and folly of the age.

    These three challenges are the reason for the conflict we have created between those of us who practice *empirical christianity* in the natural law, and those that practice spiritual and theological christianity.

    I advocate that we speak faith in matters of faith – the spirit, and law in matters of law – the material. And that if we attempt to cross those lines we must engage in deceit. And deceit is neither moral under the natural law, or moral under christian ethics.

    So we must continue our prehistoric practice of Tripartism and Trifunctionalism, which is the continuous balance of power between the Military, Law, and Faith.

    And in short, deliver unto God and Caesar each as his due.

    There is no place for theology in court.

    There is no place for court in faith.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:54:00 UTC

  • HALF TRUTHS ARE SOURCES OF IGNORANCE Yes I know of the seven laws of Noah. 😉 Th

    HALF TRUTHS ARE SOURCES OF IGNORANCE

    Yes I know of the seven laws of Noah. 😉

    They are too primitive.

    They start with god (submission) rather than sovereignty ( responsibility).

    They don’t include truthful speech regardless of cost.

    They don’t prevent the great crimes of history (sophistry, false promise, baiting into hazard, fraud)

    Instead they are the origin of the license for the great crimes of history.

    They aren’t the source of good. They are the source of evil.

    Why? Because any half truth spreads ignorance.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:53:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF MORALITY IF NOT XXXX? Very simple logic. Why should the st

    WHAT IS THE SOURCE OF MORALITY IF NOT XXXX?

    Very simple logic.

    Why should the strong not conquer, rape, pillage, and murder the weak?

    Because cooperation and numbers can be more rewarding over the long term.

    When are cooperation and numbers more rewarding than conquest, rape, pillage, and murder?

    When behavior is reciprocal.

    What does reciprocal mean?

    Do nothing that imposes costs upon the demonstrated interests of others either directly or indirectly – and conquer, rape, pillage, and murder anyone who does.

    And how do I do nothing that imposes costs upon the demonstrated interests of others either directly, or indirectly?

    Limit your display word and deed to productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer of demonstrated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality,

    The consequence: the most moral condition humanity can possibly create.

    Such men are the gods among men.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:53:00 UTC

  • MORALITY: THERE IS NOTHING COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND. The use of morality outgroup i

    MORALITY: THERE IS NOTHING COMPLEX TO UNDERSTAND.

    The use of morality outgroup is only one of utility.

    The only moral imperative ingroup is reciprocity

    The only moral choice ingroup is christian tolerance and charity within the limits of that tolerance.

    Nothing else need be said.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:52:00 UTC

  • THE DIFFICULT IDEA TO GET ACROSS (important) When I say “the big problem is swit

    THE DIFFICULT IDEA TO GET ACROSS

    (important)

    When I say “the big problem is switching people from idealism (homogenous bias) under which each person seeks whatever bias fits his, to realism (heterogeneous bias) that is aware of the market competition. In other words, monopoly is endemic in western moral thinking bcause we’ve been homogenous since our beginnings. So we have no means of defense against the LIE of the value of diversity.

    This is yet another example of the f—king stupidity of libertarian tropes (sophistry).

    If you build high trust high value commons, then diversity increases transaction costs that all ancestors worked to reduce. So the reason we seek SOME diversity is to increase novelty because we seek to hyper-consume cheap novelty (consumption that destroys commons) rather than expensive novelty (innovation, continued capitalization of commons).

    I don’t know how to explain this more simply. I would appreciate anyone who could.

    Leftists spend down inheritance to feed herd instinct for numbers.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:52:00 UTC

  • HOW DOES P-LAW DIFFER FROM PHILOSOPHY? (core) You could call P-Law Operational P

    HOW DOES P-LAW DIFFER FROM PHILOSOPHY?

    (core)

    You could call P-Law Operational Philosophy in the sequence of syllogistic reason > rationalism > set logic > operational logic > equilibrial logic (economic logic)

    0) uses series (supply demand) vs ideals.

    1) uses operational vs set logic

    2) users ternary logic not binary (undecidable, truthful, false)

    3) uses satisfaction of demand for infallibility not ideal truth

    4) tests for deceits not just errors

    5) tests for irreciprocity not just ‘good’

    6) tests for costs not just internal consistency

    7) tests for closure by reality instead of just non-contradiction

    8) tests for limits and full accounting.

    9) tests for warranty of due diligence, liability, restitutability.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:52:00 UTC

  • STATE BUREAUCRACIES MUST ORGANIZE FOR WAR I make the same argument. the CDC, Hom

    STATE BUREAUCRACIES MUST ORGANIZE FOR WAR

    I make the same argument. the CDC, Homeland Security, and Disaster Relief Organization, and The Treasury are either creating war plans and holding war games or they are wasting our time and money.

    Bureaucracies run by constant process rather than project deliverables, war plans, and shocks

    —“In 2015, I urged world leaders in a TED talk to prepare for a pandemic the same way they prepare for war — by running simulations to find the cracks in the system,” Gates wrote. “As we’ve seen this year, we have a long way to go. But I still believe that if we make the right decisions now, informed by science, data and the experience of medical professionals, we can save lives and get the country back to work.”–

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:36:00 UTC

  • RECIPROCITY (FULL VERSION) The natural law is (+)Sovereignty and (-)Reciprocity,

    RECIPROCITY (FULL VERSION)

    The natural law is (+)Sovereignty and (-)Reciprocity, in display word and deed, including reciprocity in speech (truthful speech) regardless of cost to the status(dominance, competence hierarch), within the limits of proportionality (in group defection) within the limits of the utility of cooperation (out groups).

    “Within the limits of the utility of cooperation.”

    There is no ideal. There are no ideals.

    There is only what satisfies demand for infallibility.

    FULL VERSION

    Limiting our display word and deed to:

    – Fully informed (truthful and complete);

    – Regardless of cost to the status, competence, or dominance hierarchy.

    – Productive and;

    – Voluntary transfer (or exchange, or imposition of costs upon);

    – The Demonstrated interests of Others;

    – Either directly or indirectly (by externality)

    – Within the limit of incentive for in-group defection;

    – Within The Limit of the Utility of future out-group Cooperation;

    – And liable and warrantied, within the limits of restitutability;

    – Eliminating the incentive of retaliation and retaliation cycles,

    – And imposition of costs upon the commons of trust by which others cooperate.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 14:36:00 UTC

  • “And we should be angry that our institutions have been corrupted to the point w

    —“And we should be angry that our institutions have been corrupted to the point where we had to learn to be men in the corners of the internet.”—Chris Moyer

    Source date (UTC): 2020-04-01 13:54:00 UTC