Source: Facebook

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. “Guilt Pangs of Autistics” Pangs from those m

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    “Guilt Pangs of Autistics”

    Pangs from those many times throughout your life where you correct teachers and professors with autistic frustration over some error they’re making, and they they interpret it as emotional investment on your part, or offense, or criticism of them.

    No. Um. We just can’t stand mistakes. You’re just an object like a desk or a pet. It isn’t personal. We don’t have the concept of ‘personal’ until later in life. Really. And we’re horrified when you ‘take it personally’. You just convince us that the world is full of crazy people.

    Those of us who succeed, learn to role play by imitating others. And we obtain through discipline and study that which you obtained at birth. I still may not always be able to read your facial expressions but I can read your body language just fine. The reason being that your face is subtle but your body is not. It states your understanding of our relationship every second, the way your face states your feelings.

    I have a lot of guilt pangs over those episodes. Not the least of which is in the knowledge that I couldn’t control my impulse to ‘correct’ the teachers and professors. By the time I was in my early twenties I learned to just leave the room. “There is nothing to be learned here”.

    And into my thirties I did the same with meetings (really). “There is nothing smart going on here”. I learned to vote with my feet. This had the consequence of producing respect (and fear). When it was just an attempt to control my frustration at ignorance, error, and stupidity, and to devote my time to more important issues. Walking away from stupidity is the greatest negative reinforcement you can provide.

    Now, my understanding is that along the spectrum – before we develop unrecoverable damage, we largely have higher neural density, and it simply takes longer to program that neural density with intuition than it does with practicing (repetition).

    If that is the case then we are the next step in evolution, and that next step in evolution. Why? it will take us longer to mature a human through learning than it does an animal through instinct.

    And that is an interesting evolutionary risk. Since at some point if you are so dependent upon learning over intuition, then it is a weakness for a genome.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 13:27:35 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 13:17:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle updated his status. THE STRONG CREATE THE PRIVILEGES OF THE WEAK

    Curt Doolittle updated his status.

    THE STRONG CREATE THE PRIVILEGES OF THE WEAK

    The Woman:

    —“[Some quote stating we are all brothers and sisters and should practice patience, kindness, and charity.]”— Buddha

    The Man:

    —“The greatest pleasure is to vanquish your enemies and chase them before you, to rob them of their wealth and see those dear to them bathed in tears, to ride their horses and clasp to your bosom their wives and daughters.”–Genghis Khan

    The world is filled with all types of men. The strong give the weak the privilege of meekness. The able give the incompetent the privilege of sustenance. The brave give the coward the privilege of self image. It is one thing for the weak, incompetent, and cowardly to find peace of mind in their status as dependents and quite another to claim their excuse for their condition a good, rather than the privilege of remaining the protected children of better men.

    Stoicism teaches action, achievement, and the full suite of heroic virtues are available to all of us, and that mindfulness that insulates us from the the chaos of life is available to us through the pursuit of such virtues.

    Eat the weak.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 13:05:13 UTC

  • NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFER FROM ARISTOTLE’S – TRADITIONAL PH

    NOTE HOW THESE CATEGORIES (DISCIPLINES) DIFFER FROM ARISTOTLE’S – TRADITIONAL PHILOSOPHY

    Note the order, and the pairings.

    1 – Psychology : Acquisitionism(restating psychology as acquisition)

    1 – Aesthetics : Aesthetics (a scientific restatement of aesthetics)

    2 – Metaphysics : Vitruvianism: Man as the Measure (actions determine categories)

    2 – Grammars: Grammars of Measurement (restating language as a set of grammars of continuous recursive measurements.)

    3 – Epistemology : Testimonialism (completing the scientific method and uniting all the sciences)

    3 – Truth : Testimonial Truth (an extension of performative truth)

    4 – Ethics : Propertarianism (an extension of the ethics of property)

    4 – Law : The Natural Law of Reciprocity of Sovereign Men.

    5 – Sociology : Division of Perception, Cognition, Knowledge, Labor, and Advocacy.

    5 – Politics : Markets in Everything, Market Government: Ending Monopoly Production of Commons

    6 -Group Evolutionary Strategies : Those that do and do not converge on Meritocracy, Eugenic Evolution, and Reciprocity.

    6 – War (Competition) : War by all possible means (including post-Westphalian war)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 12:00:00 UTC

  • “Gods are fictional character creations of men in the theories of men about the

    —“Gods are fictional character creations of men in the theories of men about the future potential of men.”—Alexander Brown


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 11:36:00 UTC

  • THERE IS ONLY ONE MOST PARSIMONIOUS DESCRIPTION AND ONLY MEN ARE WILLING TO SPEA

    THERE IS ONLY ONE MOST PARSIMONIOUS DESCRIPTION AND ONLY MEN ARE WILLING TO SPEAK IT

    There are an infinite number of fictions we can fabricate. There is only one most parsimonious description.

    As far as I know a god is a fictional character. A demigod is a fictional character. A hero is a fictional character. And archetypal measurements are the easiest for man to employ.

    I leave Pilpul, Critique and the Fictionalisms for Women and Abrahamists. Truth is the weapon of men for a reason, and lies the weapon of those who are not men for a reason.

    Men Truth, Duty, Sovereignty, Reciprocity, and Markets of Meritocracy.

    All else is for those who are not men, but animal.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 10:31:00 UTC

  • (STUFF I LEARNED: The night before the event, park a few cars along the route wi

    (STUFF I LEARNED: The night before the event, park a few cars along the route with trunks full of cheap basic weapons (bats, clubs, molotovs). Old used cars can be bought from private sellers the day before for a few hundred dollars. These are $1k investments. Throw molotovs BEHIND the opponents and then attack with clubs. Most groups contain a small number of men able to fight. The rest will run.)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 10:13:00 UTC

  • GODS? GUILTY AS CHARGED (edited for clarity) In the matter of gods we have only

    GODS? GUILTY AS CHARGED

    (edited for clarity)

    In the matter of gods we have only the testimony of men, and the means, motive, and opportunity to lie in their testimony. Given means motive and opportunity to lie, and no evidence of all that they speak the truth, then all gods are merely fictional characters. Those characters serve as anthropomorphic analogies. Those analogies serve as to provide decidability when we have no other means of deciding.

    It is not that gods – like all units of measurement – are not useful. They are. Particularly for the intergenerational transfer of such units of measurement.

    But there is no difference between Gandalf and Jehova and Allah other than that we make no false testimony to the existence of Gandalf, and we give false testimony to the existence of Jehova and Allah. We must give false testimony because we cannot give testimony of any other kind. It is not possible. None of us have observed the existence of any god that cannot be explained by more simple means.

    We can however, give thanks to our ancestors. That is because we have ancestors worthy of our thanks. The reason for the fabrication of Jehova and Allah is that the people who invented those fictional characters had no ancestors worthy of their thanks.

    Means, Motive, and Opportunity.

    Guilty as Charged.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 10:01:00 UTC

  • THE FRAUD OF “AN OPEN MIND” —“There is no point in arguing with someone with a

    THE FRAUD OF “AN OPEN MIND”

    —“There is no point in arguing with someone with a closed mind”— Anon

    The problem is knowing when you are asking for an open mind : meaning “time to consider the argument”, and asking someone to agree, believe, or express faith in that which is not an argument but a fraud.

    The only non-fraudulent version of that statement is:

    –“there is no point in arguing with someone who is intellectually dishonest”–

    Appeals for an ‘open mind’ are always frauds. ALWAYS. Either you have an argument or you don’t. Either the you AND the other person(s) are intellectually honest or you are not.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 09:48:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-07-04 09:42:00 UTC