Source: Facebook

  • “We depend upon Morality in the negotiation between oursleves and others for fro

    —“We depend upon Morality in the negotiation between oursleves and others for front row seats (or even seats half way) in the present theater of life. The strong have less of a need to negotiate than the weak. The weak are more fanatic about morality precisely because they lack the (inner) strength to manifest themselves in life. They need the approval of others. And the weaker you are, the more nonsense you drag into the moral negotiation.”—Roger Dols

    Good articulation – yes. Also. If you are very wealthy (which i have been), with any degree of influence (power), then you come to understand that nothing changes whatsoever, other than the wealth and influence of those who you compete with, and their decreasing compatibility of interests with you. and you can trust no one. It is nearly as difficult to defend wealth as it is to make it.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-09 10:07:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. MORALITY IS AN EXCLUSIVELY PRESENT QUESTION t

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    MORALITY IS AN EXCLUSIVELY PRESENT QUESTION

    there need be no justification for war, conquest, colonization, exploitation, decimation and genocide since moral questions are only relevant between cooperators. The past happened and we cannot alter history, only cooperate in the present or war in the present. i have no debt to the past. you have no credit from it. build a civil society today or admit you cant and need to be ruled. there are plenty of peoples more advanced that can rule if you cant. time moves. the weak are conquered. evolution continues. excuses are meaningless because the universe is deaf. the past is irrelevant. cooperate, conquer or be conquered. morality is an exclusively present question.

    — edit —

    This post is in response to intertemporal claims of debts between peoples who have been in conflict and particularly asymmetrical conflict. In the west, we do not regularly tell the Turks that they are occupying white lands. Yet we tell the arabs they are occupying jewish lands. We tell the Boers that they are occupying African lands. And texans they are occupying mexican (Amerindian) lands. And the russians are occupying Siberian and caucasian lands. And the north and south Americans occupying amerindian lands. And the amerindians occupying the previous generations of Siberians who discovered and hunted the americas first.

    I’ve answered this question before, but in my understanding, you establish ownership of territory by infrastructure and monuments (contribution) not use (extraction).

    otherwise you are making poor use of territory at others’ expense, and therefore harm by your very existence. Just as if you cannot rule without imposing costs upon your neighbors, that you are making poor use of territory at other’s expense.

    So if you cannot produce capital (physical, and institutional) then the market for territories demonstrates your unfitness to hold it. Not by arbitrary reasons but by EVOLUTIONARY means.

    Debts end when restitution is no longer possible between creditor and debtor. And when no insurer exists to enforce them. That’s just a statement of possibility. All else is just means, motive, and opportunity.

    Given: Criminal(for physical gains) > ethical (for interpersonal gains) > moral (for extrapersonal gains) > evil ( for psychic reward from interpersonal and interpersonal losses)

    Moral questions are those where our actions are unobservable and not directly calculable – say, when you bear a child you cannot afford and impose the cost of its upkeep on the community through the creation of moral hazard.

    It seems most people who are commenting confuse the practical and calculable with the moral (invisible and incalculable).

    You might say that it’s practical to avoid offending competing groups. And that the reason for practicality is incentive for retaliation against the imposition of costs upon others. And in that sense the practical and the moral are both questions imposition, but they are not equal questions of cooperation.

    Whether you are immature (stupid) enough to allow your training in jewish, christian, muslim universalism and superstition, and conflate the criminal, ethical, moral, and practical, you’re doing the same things as women do by expanding the communalism of family to the market that is the polity, by extending the market of the polity, to that of the international market of competitors.

    Conquest, Decimation, Genocide, are extremely effective. And the products of our arts and sciences are the products of groups that expand, conquer, and put territories and resources to superior use in the production of temporal and intertemporal capital.

    Always expand. Always Create. Always Innovate. Always Conquer and put to better use – assuming you can put to better use in ten accumulation of genetic, cultural, knowledge, and institutional capital.

    Evolution is the end point decision of all conflicts. Experience is only useful in getting there.
    Evolve or die.
    Eat the Weak.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-09 02:11:37 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. FRAMES…. by Bill Joslin So to distill this

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    FRAMES….
    by Bill Joslin

    So to distill this down a bit more.

    As far as I can tell, cognition has three broad frames, experiential (perceptual), imperative (action-reaction), and consequential (perceptual feedback of action-reaction).

    The progress of disambiguation of grammars has been the incremental movement toward accounting for all three frames. The ambiguous grammars have been a reduction in accounting to all three frames (ussually preferences one frame over others).

    The accounting and interplay between each frame (a market) decontextualizes the information to the consequential frame (the only frame which encompasses the other two).

    What we are doing with testimonialism is translating experiential and imperative data into a consequential frame where it can be tested (falsified)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-09 00:10:51 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“The Strategic Answer to the Parasitic Que

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“The Strategic Answer to the Parasitic Question: Survival Strategies Must Evolve to Combat Parasitism or be subsumed by it.”— Todd Magnusson

    h/t: via Bill Joslin


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 23:54:35 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. JOSLIN HITS IT OUT OF THE PARK. by Bill Josli

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    JOSLIN HITS IT OUT OF THE PARK.
    by Bill Joslin
    (Just want to say that no one else has made it this far, and bill is rocking it.)

    1 ———-

    PSYCHOLOGY
    Psychology – ostensive (experiential) argumentation to account for behavior.

    Incentive: seek a monopoly on perception via ostensive grammars

    Alternative: Aquisitionism where by human behaviour can be fully accounted via incentives.

    Outcome: a market for coherence via descriptive explanations of behaviour which can be tested with low or no context (declarative).

    2 ————

    POLITICAL *-OCRACY
    Any *-ocracy (democracy, oligarchy, Plutarchy, monarchy etc) are systemic moral justifications for control of nomocracy argued through imperatives.

    Incentive: to obtain a monopoly on the creation and execution of law – power over others argued via preferences for one “the good”.

    Alternative: propertarianism whereby all transactions must meet the criteria of perfect reciprocity.

    Outcome: disambiguous execution of law. A market for the creation of many “goods”.

    3 ———-

    RELIGIOUS THEOLOGY
    Religio-philosophical are sets of arguments for prefered criteria of measuring truth.

    Incentive: obtain a monopoly on truth (justify god like proclamations about reality). Unwarranted declaration.

    Alternative: Testimonialism which uses all available criteria to demonstrate due diligence in eliminating error, bias, and deception

    Outcome: a market for coherence.

    4 ———

    MONOPOLY(DECEPTION) VS MARKET(TRUTH)
    In all cases above, the former uses ostensive or imperative grammars to obtain a monopoly.

    Each alternative “deframes” arguments, converting ostensive and imperative grammars into declarative statements.

    Why? Because only the declarative has the quality of being testable.

    This results in the destruction of monopolies over perception, law (violence) and truth allowing reality to dictate decisions and actions.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 23:53:25 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. Lviv, Ukraine Дорогі друзі у Ль

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    Lviv, Ukraine
    Дорогі друзі у Львові.

    Мій друг з Лондона хоче квартири або кімнати з туалетом та душком на два місяці, за невеликі гроші. (<500 євро / місяць). У вас є ідеї, які я можу запропонувати йому?

    Дякую
    Kypt


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 23:47:55 UTC

  • MORALITY IS AN EXCLUSIVELY PRESENT QUESTION there need be no justification for w

    MORALITY IS AN EXCLUSIVELY PRESENT QUESTION

    there need be no justification for war, conquest, colonization, exploitation, decimation and genocide since moral questions are only relevant between cooperators. The past happened and we cannot alter history, only cooperate in the present or war in the present. i have no debt to the past. you have no credit from it. build a civil society today or admit you cant and need to be ruled. there are plenty of peoples more advanced that can rule if you cant. time moves. the weak are conquered. evolution continues. excuses are meaningless because the universe is deaf. the past is irrelevant. cooperate, conquer or be conquered. morality is an exclusively present question.

    — edit —

    This post is in response to intertemporal claims of debts between peoples who have been in conflict and particularly asymmetrical conflict. In the west, we do not regularly tell the Turks that they are occupying white lands. Yet we tell the arabs they are occupying jewish lands. We tell the Boers that they are occupying African lands. And texans they are occupying mexican (Amerindian) lands. And the russians are occupying Siberian and caucasian lands. And the north and south Americans occupying amerindian lands. And the amerindians occupying the previous generations of Siberians who discovered and hunted the americas first.

    I’ve answered this question before, but in my understanding, you establish ownership of territory by infrastructure and monuments (contribution) not use (extraction).

    otherwise you are making poor use of territory at others’ expense, and therefore harm by your very existence. Just as if you cannot rule without imposing costs upon your neighbors, that you are making poor use of territory at other’s expense.

    So if you cannot produce capital (physical, and institutional) then the market for territories demonstrates your unfitness to hold it. Not by arbitrary reasons but by EVOLUTIONARY means.

    Debts end when restitution is no longer possible between creditor and debtor. And when no insurer exists to enforce them. That’s just a statement of possibility. All else is just means, motive, and opportunity.

    Given: Criminal(for physical gains) > ethical (for interpersonal gains) > moral (for extrapersonal gains) > evil ( for psychic reward from interpersonal and interpersonal losses)

    Moral questions are those where our actions are unobservable and not directly calculable – say, when you bear a child you cannot afford and impose the cost of its upkeep on the community through the creation of moral hazard.

    It seems most people who are commenting confuse the practical and calculable with the moral (invisible and incalculable).

    You might say that it’s practical to avoid offending competing groups. And that the reason for practicality is incentive for retaliation against the imposition of costs upon others. And in that sense the practical and the moral are both questions imposition, but they are not equal questions of cooperation.

    Whether you are immature (stupid) enough to allow your training in jewish, christian, muslim universalism and superstition, and conflate the criminal, ethical, moral, and practical, you’re doing the same things as women do by expanding the communalism of family to the market that is the polity, by extending the market of the polity, to that of the international market of competitors.

    Conquest, Decimation, Genocide, are extremely effective. And the products of our arts and sciences are the products of groups that expand, conquer, and put territories and resources to superior use in the production of temporal and intertemporal capital.

    Always expand. Always Create. Always Innovate. Always Conquer and put to better use – assuming you can put to better use in ten accumulation of genetic, cultural, knowledge, and institutional capital.

    Evolution is the end point decision of all conflicts. Experience is only useful in getting there.

    Evolve or die.

    Eat the Weak.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 22:11:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. —“I’m up for via-negativa law, via-positi

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    —“I’m up for via-negativa law, via-positiva fiction, and via-reciprocity trade.”— Bryan Nova Brey


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 21:33:49 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. SOUTH AFRICA – SEPARATISM People have conquer

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    SOUTH AFRICA – SEPARATISM

    People have conquered one another since time immemorial. Intertemporal restitution is rather ridiculous concept. When white people conquered in the pre-historic world they killed most everyone they met. when white people conquered in the modern world they attempted to ‘civilize’ the people they met, for fun and profit – mostly profit. Cause domesticated humans are extremely profitable. Although at least in the americas, because of disease they killed almost everyone.

    I am not making excuses for my (white) people. I seek happiness for us all. and I want all people to prosper. However, when there are great differences between us this always creates conflict.

    In other words (a) it’s not clear that separation is not better, (b) it’s not clear that south africa will be better without separation, (c) it’s not clear that south africa will be better without the white settlers.(d) and murdering each other is not a good answer to anything – it’s not the colonial era. We know all people can develop market civilizations if they have time to develop a middle class.

    My personal view is that the Boers should relocate to America, Australia (best), or Russia (who wants them). And moreover that Africans in Europe and America Return. (and middle easterners return) And that we pay people even if we must use debt to do the returns.

    I don’t want your people harmed or mine. But I don’t believe given the very big differences, that it is easy to do anything other than separate. And I am not sure it is a good thing to stay together.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 21:10:21 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. RULE OF THE SOVEREIGN If the Truth is not eno

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    RULE OF THE SOVEREIGN

    If the Truth is not enough, and therefore law is not enough, then you are weak, and lack the agency necessary for demands of reciprocity between sovereigns. As such you may not rule, or govern, and may have only liberty(capital), freedom(property), and subsidy(insurance), by permission, as the sovereign see fit. And you may purchase liberty, freedom, subsidy, and defense under the natural law of sovereigns, by acts of and military and civic defense of the commons, civil contribution by payment of fees, and the reciprocal defense of the subsidy, property, and liberty of peers.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-08 20:15:38 UTC