Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • RECIPROCITY AND IRRECIPROCITY Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary

    RECIPROCITY AND IRRECIPROCITY

    Reciprocity: productive, fully informed, voluntary transfer, of demonstated interests, free of imposition of costs upon the demonstrated interests of others by externality, and warranted, within the limits of restitutability.

    Irreciprocity: Failing any one of the criteria for Reciprocity.

    MORAL(ETHICAL) SPECTRUM

    … … … … Evil – interpersonal, extrapersonal, irreciprocity without gain (harm for harm’s sake)

    … … … Immoral – extrapersonal irreciprocity at gain

    … … Unethical – interpersonal irreciprocity at gain

    … Criminal – direct irreciprocity at gain

    Amoral – no affect on others at gain.

    … Recirpocal – direct reciprocity at gain

    … … Ethical – interpersonal reciprocity at gain

    … … … Moral – extrapersonal reciprocity at gain

    … … … … Good – interpersonal, extrapersonal, reciprocity without gain (investment, for investment’s sake)

    The constant relation in the spectrum is reciprocity by distance self, direct, indirect

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-19 09:39:00 UTC

  • Feb 19, 2020, 4:17 AM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l0raYNvGLc&feature=shareUpdated Feb 19, 2020, 4:17 AM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-19 04:17:00 UTC

  • Feb 19, 2020, 4:16 AM

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1l0raYNvGLc&feature=shareUpdated Feb 19, 2020, 4:16 AM

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-19 04:16:00 UTC

  • NATURAL RIGHTS Technically speaking, market demand for the production of a commo

    NATURAL RIGHTS

    Technically speaking, market demand for the production of a commons(institution) that creates natural rights of appeal for defense before an insurer of some sort (court), demonstrably exist. The market demand exists. Sure. Like any commons, markets succeed or fail at producing them.

    As far as I know, the only natural right that is possible is reciprocal insurance of sovereignty against trespass(imposition of costs upon our demonstrated interests), in life(mind, body, family), liberty (privacy, movement, action, word, display, association, cooperation, production), estate (demonstrated interest, several property, share property, common property, capital), and defense (security, of life, liberty, estate).

    So Natural Rights: “Reciprocity in Sovereignty, Life, Liberty, Property, and Defense” created by “An insurer to whom one can appeal for restitution, prevention, punishment of offenders.”

    Lock didn’t get it right unfortunately.

    We can further enumerate each of these rights in order to prevent others from attempts to usurp them through sophistry and deceit.

    The declaration of human rights contains a lot of nonsense like ‘dignity’, mostly duplication, and at the end, impossible aspirations that cannot be construed as rights,

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 20:30:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/85234800_210892573642237_56826014361

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/85234800_210892573642237_56826014361

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_kg5QueHwVw/85234800_210892573642237_5682601436119040000_o_210892566975571.jpg IN THE P-Constitution, LAW, RIGHTS, COURT PRECEDE STATE. THEY ARE NOT MUTABLE

    The propertarian constitution begins with European Natural Law of Sovereigns – a Law that is not mutable and cannot be violated. Then the constitution begins with definitions and declarations about mankind, then restates that law, then the rights that stem from it, then the court process. So, rights PRECEDE the constitution of the state and its policies. This is one of the mistakes the founders made that we are correcting.

    There is no method of altering the Natural Law, Definitions of Man, Statement of the Law, Rights, and Court. There is not really any way of modifying the organization of the state. The rest consists of policies.IN THE P-Constitution, LAW, RIGHTS, COURT PRECEDE STATE. THEY ARE NOT MUTABLE

    The propertarian constitution begins with European Natural Law of Sovereigns – a Law that is not mutable and cannot be violated. Then the constitution begins with definitions and declarations about mankind, then restates that law, then the rights that stem from it, then the court process. So, rights PRECEDE the constitution of the state and its policies. This is one of the mistakes the founders made that we are correcting.

    There is no method of altering the Natural Law, Definitions of Man, Statement of the Law, Rights, and Court. There is not really any way of modifying the organization of the state. The rest consists of policies.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 19:56:00 UTC

  • THE MIND OF TRUMP —“Since this morning’s pardons, I no longer believe this is

    THE MIND OF TRUMP

    —“Since this morning’s pardons, I no longer believe this is just parody. Trump is just Trolling at this point…..”—

    Of course he’s trolling.That’s how he controls the news cycle, controls the information distributed to you, controls you, and tells you every single day that your opinion doesn’t matter, and he’s immune to your gossiping, shaming, rallying, moralizing, psychologizing undermining.

    What you never seem to grasp, is that he (and the right) are just using your (Alinsky) tactics against you. Those tactics: the female method of undermining as a means of denying the painful truth – that the left’s more aggressive social science deniers than right are theologians.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 17:07:00 UTC

  • “It would also be cool to watch you debate theologians. Not pansy ones either bu

    —“It would also be cool to watch you debate theologians. Not pansy ones either but the few who are also high level scientists.”— A Friend

    It’s a very simple argument: What is a theologian claiming: Good and wisdom, or True and demonstrable? What can they testify to? How can they demonstrate it? How can they warranty it? What is their incentive? What are the costs if they lie? Why is the world of science good for man, and the world of religion devolutionary for man? Why is science of man good and the actions of god evil? Why did christians jews and muslims create a dark age? Why are the churches full of our least competent people? Why did the churches fail to reform? Why did Europe abandon christianity? Why did the evangelical movement succeed and why are Americans leaving the church and dividing half secular and half evangelical? What should the church have done when theology was continuously defeated by science and proven false? Why did the church resist literacy of the people. Why did the church resist the printing of the bible in the people’s language? Why did the monastic orders arise if not in response tot he corruption of the church? Why did the church need the vikings to fight the crusades? Was christianity adopted or was it enforced in the past as islam is still enforced today? Did the christians destroy the ancient world, it’s monuments, it’s arts and letters, its academies, its accumulated knowledge, and instead of restoring roman order, aristocracy, literacy, and greek knowledge, drag Europe and the pagan peoples into dark ages? Why is the abrahamic method of deceit used by jews, christians and muslims used again by marxists, postmodernists, and feminist to repeat the same destruction of the old world to destroy the new – this time with false promise of economic and political reward instead of life after death and political reward? Why do theologians use the same arguments as the marxists, postmodernists, and feminists who destroy this world.

    I have never found a theological argument I cannot defeat. We know too much now. Hence (a) there currently are, and have been, many gods. (b) all gods exist as information, (c) this information exists in the minds of man, (d) this information influences individual and group behavior (e) this behavior is often good, but vulnerable to conquest – which was the purpose of the church. (f) but as a consequence it produces an addiction response when threatened, and is defended by the abrahamic method of deceit rather than just the simple statement “I have faith that if I live my life by jesus’ teachings that my life, the life of those around me, the life of my polity, and of mankind, in this world, and in the next if there is one, will be better than if I did not.”

    If you must argue your faith. you have none. Faith needs no argument. That is what it means to have faith.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 16:54:00 UTC

  • “The Case Against Reality” The case for woo woo pseudoscience. This is pseudosci

    “The Case Against Reality”

    The case for woo woo pseudoscience.

    This is pseudoscientific nonsense.

    We see actionable reality at actionable scale, using some pretty amazing instrumentation.

    We ‘predict’ (imagine consequences from) our model of the world, that is not real. That’s simply a lack of discipline.

    I can and have, and others can and have, explained consciousness – and with recent work it’s not even complicated.

    I’d like to see the ‘math’ he’s talking about because I’m pretty sure he’s hand-waving.

    He’s using Truth as an undefined ‘woo woo’ term (hand waving).

    A fitness payoff (more correctly, return on cost of continuous production)

    An organism that sees the world as it is (processes unnecessary information) that models the world independent of it’s capacity for action will be out-competed by an organism that reduces the world model necessary for action to the minimum necessary for action, and just competes on what works regardless of any model of the world. Well, this is only true to the point at which organisms can voluntarily cooperate – because there are no competitors to return on cooperation.

    The camera obscura, and the camera, are a purely physical thing without consciousness. Yet we see what the camera records, without manipulating it. Sure, we can’t see all the same colors. Some of us see more than others. But that’s a difference in resolution of color not a difference in any ‘truth’ we see.

    “Space and time don’t exist independent of our perception.” Well that’s demonstrably false. Space and time are vocabulary we use to describe what we perceive through sensory information. “There are other consciousnesses out there”.

    OMG…. I would eat these morons for lunch.

    https://youtu.be/dd6CQCbk2ro

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 15:17:00 UTC

  • “I can’t be manipulated. I’m immune. I care what my wife thinks. That’s the only

    –“I can’t be manipulated. I’m immune. I care what my wife thinks. That’s the only woman whose thinking i need to care about. And she’s happy with that monopoly on my care. And most women will be very happy with that monopoly of my care.”— Noah J Revoy

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 14:42:00 UTC

  • “Concerted, organized effort to shame western people into a pattern where were e

    —“Concerted, organized effort to shame western people into a pattern where were easily manipulated.” Like EXACTLY like what YOU do? You do realize that you perpetrate literally EVERY part of this against women. Of course you do, you’ve just found a way to capitalize on it.”— Crazy Woman

    Truth isn’t manipulation. it’s prevention of manipulation. 😉 If we force truth then we can engage in trade. If you don’t want to trade and you want to preserve manipulation then why shouldn’t we conquer and enserf you? We certainly can. Easily.

    You are using GSRRM in your post (you’re probably mentally ill or mentally underdeveloped). Around 40% of women are mentally ill. We are just getting our arms around why that is. We aren’t sure yet.

    If you were an intellectually honest, mentally stable, and engaged in reciprocity (seeking exchanges), then you would simply say ‘Yes this is true, but what can we do about it?” You didn’t do that.

    Because you are a bad person.

    Source date (UTC): 2020-02-18 14:41:00 UTC