Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • Q: “Why do you own an AR-15?” A: “Because I can’t throw a rock 3100 feet per sec

    Q: “Why do you own an AR-15?”

    A: “Because I can’t throw a rock 3100 feet per second.”

    lolz

    BTW: AR-15 = “Armalite Rifle Model 15” – by Armalite Arms, Hollywood California. (Really).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 16:06:00 UTC

  • Much like Nietzsche said, if there is one man worth inventing time travel so tha

    Much like Nietzsche said, if there is one man worth inventing time travel so that we can kill, it’s him. He invented the industrialization of lying.

    Zoroastiranism > Abrahamism > (rabbinical judaism, christianity islam) > four great civilizations destroyed > the abrahamic dark ages > a brief restoration by western civilization (yet again),

    and then the second attempt at using abrahamic speech : Rousseau > Kant > Hegel > the Continentals >

    Then the third time with pseudoscience (Boaz, Marx, Freud,Cantor, Frankfurt > Postmodernism)

    Humans are extremely susceptible to certain forms of deception and Zoroaster began the greatest crime in history that resulted in more death, poverty, and ignorance.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 15:39:00 UTC

  • photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/29356744_199758937287671_36731125865

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/29356744_199758937287671_36731125865

    photos_and_videos/TimelinePhotos_dJ9jhts2Ng/29356744_199758937287671_36731125865885745_n_199758937287671.jpg THERE IS ONLY ONE BEST SMGTHERE IS ONLY ONE BEST SMG

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 15:01:00 UTC

  • THE WEAK, THE ABLE, AND THE STRONG The weak submit, justify and breed, the able

    THE WEAK, THE ABLE, AND THE STRONG

    The weak submit, justify and breed, the able compromise and prosper, the strong decide only whether it is better to kill, enslave, enserf, rule, or cooperate Only they decide their destiny. The question of why the strong choose poorly is the only interesting question to ask.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 14:37:00 UTC

  • “The main reason most people are libertarian is because it gives you a single, s

    —“The main reason most people are libertarian is because it gives you a single, simple cheat code that automatically answers every imaginable political question – no hard thinking about cause and effect and the messy nature of implementation and real-world game theory required. It’s a sloppy shortcut towards “winning” debates and not having to deal with cognitive uncertainty. The New Right’s uniting principles, while they may be simple, don’t instantaneously answer every question for us or eliminate any of the hard work of asking, “How?”— Aedhan Cassiel

    (flawless)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 14:28:00 UTC

  • (I have had the same experience, but the difference is, that as a male, we are o

    (I have had the same experience, but the difference is, that as a male, we are often happy to compete rather than conform. So as she describes herself as a bleeding heart liberal – in other words has the intuitions of a female – I ended up the opposite specializing in competition and natural law – with the intuitions of a male. As far as I know the autism spectrum increases the distance between our intuitions and our reason for what appear to be extremely trivial reasons in the early neural economy – but that has had zero impact on how we decide those questions that are solved only by intuition: by rather than reason. Women think like women do, and men think like men do, because our competing gender reproductive strategies evolved prior to our use of reason, and almost certainly before our development of consciousness. There is a difference between the male and female brain structure due to the development of that distance, but there is also a difference between the male and female structure due to endocrine influences. But we can still observe that we see both genders with both reproductive, social and cognitive biases each varying along the male and female axis of development.)

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 14:18:00 UTC

  • MATHINESS, SCIENTISM, AND IDEALISM vs OPERATIONALISM Many people here scientism

    MATHINESS, SCIENTISM, AND IDEALISM vs OPERATIONALISM

    Many people here scientism or mathiness and hear profundity. I hear a pseudoscientific priesthood talking just like you hear theologians or rationalists (or continental philosophers) speaking.

    Mathiness is actually the origin of the failing of western philosophy until the stoics. Pythagoras, Aristotle, Zeno’s genius was undermined by Plato’s catastrophe and Augustine and Pauls’ crime against western civilization, and abraham and muhammad’s transformation of persian and egyptian mythology into a false history and immoral laws – a crime against humanity. Unequalled until Rousseau, Kant, Boaz, Marx, Freud, cantor, mises, rothbard, and Strauss all repeated the process of fictionalism – this time in pseudoscientific, pseudo rational(philosophical), and pseudo historical prose.

    I spend most of my time criticizing economics as a means of restoring empirical law.

    But yesterday I happened across an interesting bit of ‘scientism’ that was ‘scienticsm’ rather than science, because it is dependent upon mathiness.

    Most of what I see in physics today, and most of what I see in frankly all the sciences, whenever someone explains relationships rather than explains transformations – is mathiness.

    Idealism, mathiness, scientism are all failures to speak in the language of truth:

    Operations.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 13:57:00 UTC

  • AN EXAMPLE OF TESTIMONIAL PROSE –“the left and right both argue for inclusion b

    AN EXAMPLE OF TESTIMONIAL PROSE

    –“the left and right both argue for inclusion but along different lines.”– A Friend

    Dysgenic expansion on the left (female), vs eugenic expansion on the right (male)

    Female and male strategies compete. Or perhaps ‘adapt’ is a better way of looking at it.

    So ‘along different lines’ obscure that those lines are not ‘relative’ but produce vastly different externalities.

    This is an example why I use operational langauge and full accounting – I don’t leave obscurant statements un accounted for.

    Testimonialism:

    1 – Operational Language (Operations are measurements)

    2 – Deflated vocabular tested by series.

    3 – Complete Sentences describing complete transactions.

    4 – Testing Rational Choice, and Reciprocity

    5 – Accounting for the seen (internal) and unseen (external).

    By simple use of operational grammar (the rules I just stated) we test categorical, logical, empirical, existential, rational, reciprocal, fully accounted prose just a surely as we test any statement in other logics and mathematics.

    In other words, just as all other forms of calculation falsify but do not justify, operational grammar falsified but does not justify.

    The only difference is that operational grammar is complete in that it includes all actionable dimensions of reality, not some subset or general rule of reality.

    If one cannot make such a statement in operational language he knows not of what he speaks. He just uses convention and habit like any other storyteller.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 13:09:00 UTC

  • THE ORIGIN OF THE ANGLO FREE MARKET VS THE JEWISH FREE MARKET. The free market w

    THE ORIGIN OF THE ANGLO FREE MARKET VS THE JEWISH FREE MARKET.

    The free market was envisioned for the known purposes of (a) creating peaceful relations between then expanding empires, and (b) explaining why people treated each other well in ordinary commercial life vs inter-tribal life, (c) making use of comparative advantage between non-enemies. (d) reducing artificial shortages of food in particular that gave profits to large land holders at the cost of starving citizens.

    The free market ideology was a jewish invention, just as were the opposing forces of capitalism and communism.

    In the west it’s just simple reciprocity or not (unearned gains).

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 12:43:00 UTC

  • PETERSON EXPLAINED: He is attempting (unconsciously) to restore Stoicism (Self a

    PETERSON EXPLAINED:

    He is attempting (unconsciously) to restore Stoicism (Self authoring) while also restoring mythology because of the correlation between our intuitions (biology) and archetypes (narratives). In this sense he is reforming religion from supernatural to scientific.

    We all carry our class, culture, and religion with us. We don’t know how much of it is genetic, and how much learned. It’s probably like all else, more genetic than we wish to admit. We all intuit man as between Rousseau’s and Hobbes’ vision. The evidence is ‘neither’.

    Pinker intuits closer to rousseau and is optimistic, Peterson more towards Smith, and Pessimistic. These are assessments and intuitons not evidentiary truths. If we look at history, man is amoral: moral(reciprocal) immoral (irreciprocal) as suits him.

    We have just made it increasingly costly to prefer immorality (free riding, parasitism, predation) over morality (voluntary, fully informed, productive exchange). And as such vastly increased the time man devotes to moral activity, and the disproportionate returns on trade.

    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-18 12:37:00 UTC