Source: Facebook

  • So in other words, you don’t have an argument, because you can’t make an argumen

    So in other words, you don’t have an argument, because you can’t make an argument, because you lack the knowledge and ability to make an argument, because you lack the agency and ability to gain the knowledge to construct an argument. 😉 (infantilism)


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:21:00 UTC

  • If you had an argument you’d make one other than demonstrate your ignorance of i

    If you had an argument you’d make one other than demonstrate your ignorance of intellectual history, by schoolgirl disapproval, shaming, gossip and rallying. You’re demonstrated evidence of the veracity of his arguments. Those who cannot argue the facts gossip rally and shame.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:20:00 UTC

  • There are many, many smart people, and many smarter than Peterson, there just ar

    There are many, many smart people, and many smarter than Peterson, there just aren’t many very smart people who are right – and right at the time we need them to be right. #JordanPeterson


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:20:00 UTC

  • Um. Zizek practices critique. He isn’t actually directly in favor of anything, h

    Um. Zizek practices critique. He isn’t actually directly in favor of anything, he just criticizes everything. Why?Because nothing he wants is possible, and if stated positively we’d walk away shaking our heads. But Both of them are Plato’s children and a conversation interesting.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:20:00 UTC

  • If I make statements that are consistent, correspondent, coherent, reciprocal, a

    If I make statements that are consistent, correspondent, coherent, reciprocal, and fully accounted, then why must I say something NEW in order to say something TRUE? Each generation restates wisdom literature in generational prose. Hence persistence of paradigms over generations.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:19:00 UTC

  • You don’t understand Peterson? Let me help you:Peterson is redeveloping Stoicism

    You don’t understand Peterson? Let me help you:Peterson is redeveloping Stoicism in rational prose, and uniting it with narrative and archetypes because those archetypes are biologically determined. He’s recreating the Lost Philosophy-Religion of our Ancestors. #JordanPeterson


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:19:00 UTC

  • Updated Mar 16, 2018, 9:17 PM

    Updated Mar 16, 2018, 9:17 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:17:00 UTC

  • Mar 16, 2018, 9:16 PM

    http://www.ancient-origins.net/history/social-impact-bow-and-arrow-prehistoric-america-009759http://www.ancient-origins.net/history/social-impact-bow-and-arrow-prehistoric-america-009759Updated Mar 16, 2018, 9:16 PM


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 21:16:00 UTC

  • WORTH REPEATING Anything important that can be said about economics or law, can

    WORTH REPEATING

    Anything important that can be said about economics or law, can only be said about externalities. The only way to restore libertarianism to the discipline of the natural law of reciprocity in the anglo saxon tradition, is to return commons and externalities to the discourse.

    !!!!Only Commons Produce Private Property!!!!


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 20:55:00 UTC

  • HAYEK VS MISES (RESPONDING TO BOB MURPHY) 1- Mises always and everywhere only ad

    HAYEK VS MISES (RESPONDING TO BOB MURPHY)

    1- Mises always and everywhere only addresses commodities (cherry picking) and never addresses the rest of the capital stack which makes commodity trade possible – particularly tacit knowledge capital (all paradigms). Hayek’s Serfdom includes ALL capital.

    2 – Of calculation and incentive, incentive, norms, traditions, and institutions, have been demonstrably superior to calculation in influence. Impositions on calculation are costly, and shocks must be absorbed by the polity, but function is demonstrably possible.

    3 – If we look at the soviets who are our best living example, the problem was not the economics of organizing production of housing (which they were exceptional at), but the fact that the craftsman lost interest in competitive advantage and skills were lost.

    4 – Hayek was among the first to change the category of analysis from the physical to information -which is how all sciences function today. Mises was the first to discover economic operationalism but he understood math and science too poorly to understand what he’d done.

    5 – In all things, Mises was only half right, which is the problem we fall into whenever we cherry pick what we measure. Hayek started with cognition, and worked through economics, and finally understood behavioral capital was created by TORT LAW, and all else was a consequence.

    6 – MI/Rothbardians fight the last battle -one that doesn’t matter, with shoddy arms. The Marxist era of Pseudoscience was over by 1970. We have been fighting Rousseau v2 in Postmodernism: Silencing, Ridicule and Denial, just as we battled Christianity and Islam in antiquity.

    7 – No one tries to advocate socialism. They try to achieve Pareto Maximums, wherein the maximum extraction from the productive can be used to buy the fealty of the non, in order to extract rents, and denial of any science or reason.

    Mises was only half wrong but fully irrelevant. Hayek was right and prescient: Prohibit the bad and all that is left is good.And the means of incremental empirical suppression of the bad is the dry evolutionary process we call the judge discovered common law of tort: Reciprocity.

    8 – Just as we have discovered in science, all truth is determined by exhaustive attempts at falsification. The same is true in social orders. Exhaustively falsify lying, cheating, theft, and violence by any and all means, and all incentives and institutions develop in response.

    You are rarely wrong. In fact, in the entire discipline you are pretty much the only person rarely wrong.But the fact that you don’t take the argument through the conclusion, simply perpetuates everything that has led anarchism to a dead end. Only Commons Produce Private Property

    Anything important that can be said about economics or law, can only be said about externalities. The only way to restore libertarianism to the discipline of the natural law of reciprocity in the anglo saxon tradition, is to return commons and externalities to the discourse.


    Source date (UTC): 2018-03-16 20:55:00 UTC