Source: Facebook

  • No matter what excuse you make for Abrahamism, in order to justify your priors,

    No matter what excuse you make for Abrahamism, in order to justify your priors, you’re stuck with one question: if it’s good, then why do you need to lie about it?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 10:18:00 UTC

  • “Curt, You should talk to X!!!”— Anon Translated: Curt, I have this frame of r

    —“Curt, You should talk to X!!!”— Anon

    Translated: Curt, I have this frame of reference. Can you talk in my frame of reference?

    I get this all the time because some writer somewhere said something that made sense to somebody.

    In other words, “Can you do the work for me?”. So instead, say “so and so says this, and I felt this, can you tell me what you think about it?”

    Well you know I provided a universal frame of reference right? That’s what acquisitionism, propertarianism, and testimonialism do right?

    Why is it that I should talk to people who do NOT talk in a universal frame of reference?

    I don’t need to find a way to make excuses or lie in some other frame of reference in order to justify my objectives.

    It’s up to others to justify their frames of reference and objectives if they violate acquisitionism, propertarianism, testimonialism: the natural law of reciprocity.

    Ya see? Its like asking a mathematician using measurements to talk in nonsense like ‘Oh, it’s about a country mile as the crow flies…”

    (Excuse my frustration.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 09:58:00 UTC

  • “Aren’t you implicitly conflating the hard sciences with computer programming? I

    —“Aren’t you implicitly conflating the hard sciences with computer programming? It seems so. For you the sciences at hand are absolutely sufficient for every decision making, which (I assume, sorry) is boiling down to the Boolean algebra.”—Igor Rogov

    I’m saying that there is only one ‘science’: truth telling, and that the scientific method, if completed (via testimonialism) unifies science, philosophy, law, and evolutionary biology.

    properties > category > sets > operations > sequential operations > externalities from sequential operations > macro-patterns from externalities.

    And that while computers can COMPUTE algorithms using TYPES, humans can CALCULATE ‘routes’ using CATEGORIES


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 08:40:00 UTC

  • THE LIMITS OF THE MONOMYTH – ENDING DECEIT BY MYTHOS BY ENDING ABRAHAMISM (more

    THE LIMITS OF THE MONOMYTH – ENDING DECEIT BY MYTHOS BY ENDING ABRAHAMISM

    (more on extending – or limiting – Peterson’s thesis)

    Whereas:

    It is very hard to create a fiction (myth) that fails to ‘ring true’ because it makes use of the Monomyth, Limited Plots, the Archetypes, and the Virtues – and these categories reflect the methods of acquisition of methods of transcendence available to our psychology.

    It is very easy to create fictions in western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by (a) the use of hyperbole (illustration by magnification), while avoiding idealism and supernaturalism, (b) the only difference between men, heroes, demigods, and gods, is the degree of their mortality or immortality, and the degree of hyperbolic exaggeration of their abilities, (c) men, heroes, demigods, and gods, are all bound by the forces of nature (d) the gods and demigods are flawed and capricious members of extended families (e) men, heroes and demigods can defeat the flaws and capriciousness of the gods, demigods, the heroes of our enemies, and our enemies by means of courage, wit, discipline, and sacrifice – “man can defeat evil men, the god and nature” (e)

    It is very easy to create fictions that are incompatible with western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by means of inserting deceptions in the form of (a)idealism, (b)supernaturalism, (c)the power of gods over the forces of nature (d) contriving man’s inability to defeat gods (e) misrepresenting the will and intention of gods (f) demanding submission to gods, (g) directing protagonists to submit to this world of the gods rather than to transform it for the betterment of man. (h) directing we circumvent the costs of changing the world for the better because of its hopelessness.

    It is very easy to create fictions that are critical of western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy, by lionizing protagonists that defeat it. (marxist, and postmodern myths and pseudo-histories)

    It is very easy to create many trivial ‘essays’ rather than narratives outside of the monomyth in order to communicate experiences not lessons – as a means of criticizing the ‘meaningful’ monomyths and its Transcendence. (Postmodern literature)

    It is all too easy to create pseudoscience – Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor – (marxists), by overloading the knowledge and reasoning of people thereby forcing appeal to intuition rather than reason.

    It is all too easy to create pseudo-rationlism (pretense of philosophy) by loading, framing, overloading the rather limited abilities of people to reason thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy (reason).

    It is all too easy to outright lie and chant propaganda (political correctness), thereby overloading their ability, desire, and NEED to reason, thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy rather than simply propaganda, falsehood, and lie.

    It is all too easy for humans to fall prey to comforting lies, just as they fall prey to alcohol and drugs and gambling and a hundred other destructive vices. And that some myths *are designed precisely to do that*. After all, what is the difference between pedagogical myth for the purpose of transcendence so that one can succeed in the ‘market’ we call reality, and deceptive myth for the purpose of containment so that one can merely survive in a reality absent a market for transcendence because it is either impossible or one has been deluded that it is not desirable?

    Therefore:

    (1) the monomyth/archetype/plot/virtue structure is not enough to teach the virtues because it is not enough to defend against entrapment in deceit that counters the virtues. We can teach with the myths, but we can also DECEIVE with the myths. Because both teaching and deception require the use of ‘suggestion’ which provokes free association, which results in meaning. So we can either create true and good or false and bad meaning.

    (2) the *limits of myths* are just as necessary as the contents of those myths. In particular there is a vast difference between history, fiction, hyperbolic myth, idealism and supernaturalism. And a vast difference between submission and transcendence through action. So the myths constructed from the monomyth architecture can use good or bad virtues, good or bad limits, and good or bad methods of discourse. The good: historical, fictional, and hyperbolic, or the bad: ideal and supernatural and fictionalism.

    (3) myths can be used to harm mankind – and abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity and islam have been used to harm mankind. In the case of judaism, the most literate people contributed nothing until converted to Aristotelianism; the christian dark ages were not exited until the reassertion of aristotelianism, and islam destroyed four ancient civilizations during their period of expansion, caused the majority of the european dark age, caused more death than the black plagues, and has caused ignorance, dysgenia, and poverty wherever it has gone. The the german abrahamists tried kantian idealism (pseudo-rationalism), the Jewish abrahamists tried pseudoscience via marx, freud and boaz; the french abrahamists tried postmodernism(anti reason, anti-logic, anti-truth, anti-science), and now the islamists have doubled-down on fundamentalism (anti-reason), raiding (terrorism), and dysgenia (overpopulation), and invasion (immigration) and propaganda (conversion).

    Summation:

    Reality is difficult. The universe is hostile to us. Other peoples are hostile to us. the west, the iranian branch, and the vedic branch created aristocracy

    The western group evolutionary strategy is profoundly expensive. We must act heroically. We must suppress our impulses. We must speak the truth regardless of its costs to the dominance hierarchy. We must participate in a militia. We can only gain the franchise through demonstrated sacrifice for the polity.

    The enemy of Aristocracy (meritocracy, truth, heroism, eugenics, excellence) is abrahamism (equality, dysgenia, falsehood, submission, subsistence).

    This battle has raged at least since 500bc. Arguably it has raged since the invention of fictionalism by Zoroaster: Zoroaster > Abrahamism > Judaism > the heresy of christianity > The heresy of Islam > the french, german, jewish and russian counter-enlightenments.

    REMEDY

    Today we will either end the second conquest of the west by waves of abrahamism, using a demand for (scientific) truth, goodness(heroism), and beauty(excellence), or we will collapse again into a dark age from which man may never recover – abrahamism is a desirable cancer of the mind, just as much as alcohol and opiates and religions are a desirable cancer of the mind.

    Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism provide a method for the value neutral, loading neutral, framing neutral, analysis of the truth and falsehood, good and bad, of all human expression – including that of the Myths: Monomyth > Plots > Archetypes > and Virtues.

    End abrahamism, and end idealism, and require truth in matters of politics and thereby limit all actions and speech to fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfers of goods, services, and information, free of imposition by externality of costs upon the investments of others.

    It’s trivial. But we must abandon convenient habitual lies just as we have abandoned the convenience of fraud, the convenience of theft, and the convenience of violence, and the convenience of murder.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 08:25:00 UTC

  • THE MONOMYTH, ITS LIMITS, AND THE ENDING OF ABRAHAMISM It is very hard to create

    THE MONOMYTH, ITS LIMITS, AND THE ENDING OF ABRAHAMISM

    It is very hard to create a fiction (myth) that fails to ‘ring true’ because it makes use of the Monomyth, Limited Plots, the Archetypes, and the Virtues – and these categories reflect the methods of acquisition of methods of transcendence available to our psychology.

    It is very easy to create fictions in western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by (a) the use of hyperbole (illustration by magnification), while avoiding idealism and supernaturalism, (b) the only difference between men, heroes, demigods, and gods, is the degree of their mortality or immortality, and the degree of hyperbolic exaggeration of their abilities, (c) men, heroes, demigods, and gods, are all bound by the forces of nature (d) the gods and demigods are flawed and capricious members of extended families (e) men, heroes and demigods can defeat the flaws and capriciousness of the gods, demigods, the heroes of our enemies, and our enemies by means of courage, wit, discipline, and sacrifice – “man can defeat evil men, the god and nature” (e)

    It is very easy to create fictions that are incompatible with western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy by means of inserting deceptions in the form of (a)idealism, (b)supernaturalism, (c)the power of gods over the forces of nature (d) contriving man’s inability to defeat gods (e) misrepresenting the will and intention of gods (f) demanding submission to gods, (g) directing protagonists to submit to this world of the gods rather than to transform it for the betterment of man. (h) directing we circumvent the costs of changing the world for the better because of its hopelessness.

    It is very easy to create fictions that are critical of western civilization’s group evolutionary strategy, by lionizing protagonists that defeat it. (marxist, and postmodern myths and pseudo-histories)

    It is very easy to create many trivial ‘essays’ rather than narratives outside of the monomyth in order to communicate experiences not lessons – as a means of criticizing the ‘meaningful’ monomyths and its Transcendence. (Postmodern literature)

    It is all too easy to create pseudoscience – Boaz, Marx, Freud, Cantor – (marxists), by overloading the knowledge and reasoning of people thereby forcing appeal to intuition rather than reason.

    It is all too easy to create pseudo-rationlism (pretense of philosophy) by loading, framing, overloading the rather limited abilities of people to reason thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy (reason).

    It is all too easy to outright lie and chant propaganda (political correctness), thereby overloading their ability, desire, and NEED to reason, thereby forcing appeal to intuition instead of reason – yet calling it philosophy rather than simply propaganda, falsehood, and lie.

    It is all too easy for humans to fall prey to comforting lies, just as they fall prey to alcohol and drugs and gambling and a hundred other destructive vices. And that some myths *are designed precisely to do that*. After all, what is the difference between pedagogical myth for the purpose of transcendence so that one can succeed in the ‘market’ we call reality, and deceptive myth for the purpose of containment so that one can merely survive in a reality absent a market for transcendence because it is either impossible or one has been deluded that it is not desirable?

    THEREFORE

    (1) the monomyth/archetype/plot/virtue structure is not enough to teach the virtues because it is not enough to defend against entrapment in deceit that counters the virtues. We can teach with the myths, but we can also DECEIVE with the myths. Because both teaching and deception require the use of ‘suggestion’ which provokes free association, which results in meaning. So we can either create true and good or false and bad meaning.

    (2) the *limits of myths* are just as necessary as the contents of those myths. In particular there is a vast difference between history, fiction, hyperbolic myth, idealism and supernaturalism. And a vast difference between submission and transcendence through action. So the myths constructed from the monomyth architecture can use good or bad virtues, good or bad limits, and good or bad methods of discourse. The good: historical, fictional, and hyperbolic, or the bad: ideal and supernatural and fictionalism.

    (3) myths can be used to harm mankind – and abrahamism in the form of judaism, christianity and islam have been used to harm mankind. In the case of judaism, the most literate people contributed nothing until converted to Aristotelianism; the christian dark ages were not exited until the reassertion of aristotelianism, and islam destroyed four ancient civilizations during their period of expansion, caused the majority of the european dark age, caused more death than the black plagues, and has caused ignorance, dysgenia, and poverty wherever it has gone. The the german abrahamists tried kantian idealism (pseudo-rationalism), the Jewish abrahamists tried pseudoscience via marx, freud and boaz; the french abrahamists tried postmodernism(anti reason, anti-logic, anti-truth, anti-science), and now the islamists have doubled-down on fundamentalism (anti-reason), raiding (terrorism), and dysgenia (overpopulation), and invasion (immigration) and propaganda (conversion).

    SUMMATION

    Reality is difficult. The universe is hostile to us. Other peoples are hostile to us. the west, the iranian branch, and the vedic branch created aristocracy

    The western group evolutionary strategy is profoundly expensive. We must act heroically. We must suppress our impulses. We must speak the truth regardless of its costs to the dominance hierarchy. We must participate in a militia. We can only gain the franchise through demonstrated sacrifice for the polity.

    The enemy of Aristocracy (meritocracy, truth, heroism, eugenics, excellence) is abrahamism (equality, dysgenia, falsehood, submission, subsistence).

    This battle has raged at least since 500bc. Arguably it has raged since the invention of fictionalism by Zoroaster: Zoroaster > Abrahamism > Judaism > the heresy of christianity > The heresy of Islam > the french, german, jewish and russian counter-enlightenments.

    REMEDY

    Today we will either end the second conquest of the west by waves of abrahamism, using a demand for (scientific) truth, goodness(heroism), and beauty(excellence), or we will collapse again into a dark age from which man may never recover – abrahamism is a desirable cancer of the mind, just as much as alcohol and opiates and religions are a desirable cancer of the mind.

    Acquisitionism, Propertarianism, and Testimonialism provide a method for the value neutral, loading neutral, framing neutral, analysis of the truth and falsehood, good and bad, of all human expression – including that of the Myths: Monomyth > Plots > Archetypes > and Virtues.

    End abrahamism, and end idealism, and require truth in matters of politics and thereby limit all actions and speech to fully informed, productive, warrantied, voluntary transfers of goods, services, and information, free of imposition by externality of costs upon the investments of others.

    It’s trivial. But we must abandon convenient habitual lies just as we have abandoned the convenience of fraud, the convenience of theft, and the convenience of violence, and the convenience of murder.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 08:21:00 UTC

  • ( F–king republicans and their ‘tax credit’ nonsense….. Three tiers: fast fan

    ( F–king republicans and their ‘tax credit’ nonsense….. Three tiers: fast fancy service for those of us with cash, fast less fancy service for those with private health care, and slower much less fancy care for medicare medicaid. Why? Pay for time and customer service not medical care. Wealthy people pay exorbitantly for concierge service and extending the last year of life, private pay for customer service, and public don’t – because of europe-like delays. )


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 07:55:00 UTC

  • ARE HUMANS ALIKE? 1) The Wise make arguments to incentives and institutions 2) T

    ARE HUMANS ALIKE?

    1) The Wise make arguments to incentives and institutions

    2) The Fools make arguments to law and government

    3) The Youth make arguments to morality and shame

    4) The Children make arguments to approval and disapproval.

    1) we are alike ‘enough’ or we could not empathize.

    2) we are alike ‘enough in empathy that we can cooperate

    3) we are alike ‘enough’ that we can cooperate on means if not ends.

    4) we are unlike ‘enough’ to choose not to cooperate on means or ends.

    5) we are unlike ‘enough’ to conflict in ethics and politics

    6) we are unlike ‘enough’ that we war nearly constantly.

    7) we are unlike ‘enough’ to engage in culture-cide, and genocide.

    AFAIK,

    (a) median intelligence is proxy for neoteny (domestication) but not

    morality, and;

    (b) median intelligence determines demand for habits, norms, traditions and institutions, and ;

    (c) norms, traditions, and institutions determine the degree of trust that is possible even if unachieved, and;

    (d) the degree of trust determines the productivity of a polity relative to its competitors.

    Therefore

    (e) the standard of any polity is determined not by its best but by the size of its worst. In other words, the only way to improve a polity is the reduction of the scale of the underclasses.

    MARKET LIMIT

    The limit to all markets from commercial to reproduction to association, is whenever the benefit to the self, even in fully informed, productive, voluntary exchange, produces externalities that impose costs upon the retained capital (in all forms) of others.

    Ergo, there is a limit to free trade, and a limit to free association before one is merely profiting from the imposition of costs upon others while claiming one is virtuous.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 07:41:00 UTC

  • THE CONFLICT: ABRAHAMISM OR ARYANISM? By Daniel Gurpide (excellent) I think hero

    THE CONFLICT: ABRAHAMISM OR ARYANISM?

    By Daniel Gurpide (excellent)

    I think heroism boils down to the monomyth, as Curt usually reminds us: transcendence.

    The possibility of transcendence for Abrahamism takes place in the world beyond, in meta-physics; for Aryanism, on the other hand, it takes place in this world, in meta-history, through the announcement of the the Nietzschean “Übermensch”.

    In this sense, the hero’s journey might require sometimes an enemy, which can also be oneself, or the representation that we choose to have of our own past, and more generally of the universe, in relation to the future, the destiny that we want to create.

    Virgil stated, ‘We make our destiny by our choice of the Gods.’ Any decision on the future is always a decision on the past—on the origins—and vice versa.

    The cultural battle today implies, as always, a conflict of genealogies: Abrahamism or Aryanism?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-23 07:25:00 UTC

  • “Pilpul offends me. The fact that we’re not allowed to simply kill such creature

    —“Pilpul offends me. The fact that we’re not allowed to simply kill such creatures offends me. The fact that there is an entire people/culture/religion based around psychopathy as a group evolutionary strategy, offends me. Wasting a minute of my time slogging through that dreck, when it’s obvious someone is motivated to their core, by malice and duplicity, and will never even state a plain fact unless pinned down, with all alternatives denied, offends me to my core. It’s cognitively, and emotionally draining dealing with them. And they don’t even seem human. It’s like a malignant, unfathomable, hostile, alien, entity, with a human mask. And the damage it’s done, down through the years. It’s worth a lot of false positives to avoid false negatives in the identification and elimination of such evil.”—- Eli Harman


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 22:17:00 UTC

  • Art Of Revolution #Trump

    https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/878053017840439296/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=curtdoolittle&utm_content=878053017840439296The Art Of Revolution #Trump https://t.co/tEzIb9mStq


    Source date (UTC): 2017-06-22 20:52:00 UTC