Source: Facebook

  • ( Thoughts … Josh (all) what if we simply took quotes, excerpts, examples from

    ( Thoughts … Josh (all) what if we simply took quotes, excerpts, examples from science, history, literature, myth, and the ‘occult’ for major topics. In other words, why settle on a monopoly method of argument? In other words, don’t conflate into a monopoly argument, but preserve deflation while making use of conflationary readings? )


    Source date (UTC): 2017-04-01 10:34:00 UTC

  • “CENSORSHIP” TOOL – FILTERS EMOTIONAL LOADING. HOW LONG BEFORE ITS DEFEATED? NOT

    http://www.perspectiveapi.com/GOOGLE’S “CENSORSHIP” TOOL – FILTERS EMOTIONAL LOADING. HOW LONG BEFORE ITS DEFEATED? NOT LONG.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 22:16:00 UTC

  • ON FAITH(RELIGION) VS TRUTH(LAW) An Open Letter To Traditionalists (from elsewhe

    ON FAITH(RELIGION) VS TRUTH(LAW)

    An Open Letter To Traditionalists

    (from elsewhere)(important)

    1) I was raised a catholic, and identify with the pre-vatican ii church. I consider vatican ii a disaster. I consider the chair of st peter empty. I consider the current pope a false pope.

    2) I write for an audience in the language that they can understand. It does not mean I cannot write for different audiences, in their languages – languages that they will understand. The problem in talking to traditionalists is one that is common, and we just saw in the debate between Jordan Peterson and Sam Harris: the difference between conflationary, and coherent truth that combines the good, spirit, literature, and meaning, with the true regardless of existential limits, – and deflationary, descriptive truth within existential limits and free of judgements spirit, literature, and goodness. However, I must explain the importance of that difference.

    2) My understanding is that the spiritual experience is necessary and that the church provided it. That this experience can be provided to many by Ritual(Repetition), by Action-Discipline (Stoicism), by Disconnected Mental Discipline(Mindfulness) and by Prayer and Contemplation (language). That the church and temple experience is necessary for the experience and training in sacredness (emotional security). That the literary experience is necessary for our envisioning of possibilities(Intellectual security). That the scientific experience is necessary for the cooperation of men in transforming the universe for our use (practical security). And that the juridical experience is necessary for the resolution of our disputes – (security of life, property, family and society). And that the military experience is necessary for all security – particularly for men. And that in the west, we developed all of these languages and traditions to provide for all those needs.

    3) I specialize in Action: the practical (scientific), Juridical (Life and Property), and Military (civilization itself). I do not specialize Experience: in the spiritual, the sacred, or the literary. There are reasons for this division of specialization. They are good reasons: competition keeps us free of corruption of spirit, sacred, and literary that we have seen in some civilizations, and the corruption of science, justice, and violence in other civilizations …. and that we have seen in christian civilization since the lies of Boaz, Freud, Marx, and Frankfurt, and the lies of the French and the Postmodernists who tried to recreate a pseudo-scientific religion, were industrialized by mainstream media for the profit of business, finance, academy, politician and bureaucracy at the expense of soul, individual, family, civilization, law, and religion so carefully constructed by the church over millennia. So I work at deconflating the experiential and the actionable because the conflation of the experiential and the actionable, the good and the true, the ideal and the possible, were the means by which our church and our civilization was undermined – by intent, and continues to this day.

    This is a more technical way of saying that faith teaches the golden rule, and law the silver rule.

    4) There are many degrees of decidability. Between one feeling and another. Between a preference and another. Between one parable and another. Between that which is reasonable (Understandable) and another. Between that which is rational (non contradictory) and another. Between that which is more correspondent with reality and that which is less so. Between that which is existentially possible (operational) and that which is not. Between that which is economically possible (tolerable) and that which is not. Between that which is voluntary and that which is not. Between that which produces beneficial unintended consequences, and that which does not.

    But principally, we divide these methods into Spiritual, Mythical, literary, traditional, moral, reasonable, rational, logical, empirical, and scientific. When we have a great deal of information we may use the scientific. When we are highly uncertain, we rely on the moral, traditional literary, mythical, and spiritual. The more information we possess the more reason (calculation), the less we possess the more intuition (spirit).

    We can identify an attempt at deception when a question may be answered by use of a method of decidability of greater precision because we have the information necessary to use that method of greater precision. Or when one attempts to use a method of more precise decidability, yet we lack the information to apply that method of decidability. We can create frauds either way.

    But we are mere mortals, we vary in ability, in education, in experience, and in mastery.

    This is a more technical way of saying that the world of the spirit belongs to God (Faith and Religion), and the world of action belongs to Caesar (Science and Law).

    5) So I teach ‘convergence’ -and that is, that we must – as humans – practice the spiritual, literary, conflationary, and meaningful to cooperate, and we must practice the actionable, descriptive, deflationary, and ‘true’ to resolve conflicts.

    And so I leave the ‘good’ for those who conflate, and I practice the ‘true’ for those of us, who, unfortunately, must resolve conflicts between people – provide restitution if possible, punishment if not, and death if necessary. And it is this convergence and competition that keeps the faith and the law uncorrupted. And it is the conflation of faith and law that corrupts both.

    This is a more technical way of saying that some of you wish to sit in safety at the right and hand of god, to do what might be done to create good: inform and advice. Some of us sit at the left and of god, to do what must be done: judge and punish, to end and prevent bad. Between possible goods and certain bads, we prevent each other’s corruption and do what Christendom has done best: build a world that the rest is in envy of.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 21:37:00 UTC

  • Thou shalt make no statistical claim about mankind that does not survive constru

    Thou shalt make no statistical claim about mankind that does not survive construction from a sequence of rational actions within each quintile.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 17:02:00 UTC

  • Thoughts?

    Thoughts?


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 16:03:00 UTC

  • It’s not difficult. a) if they don’t impose costs on you, yours, or your commons

    It’s not difficult. a) if they don’t impose costs on you, yours, or your commons do the same. b) if they conduct productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchanges with you, yours, and your commons, do the same. c) if they are willing to conduct productive fully informed, warrantied voluntary exchanges with you but can’t, then impose rule of law for them as an investment, so that they can. d) if they impose ANY unwanted costs on you, yours, or your commons, then kill, rape, pillage, enslave and destroy them. No mercy.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 14:45:00 UTC

  • Q&A: “CURT: HOW HAVE YOUR VIEWS CHANGED?” —“Hey Curt. Quick question that I wo

    Q&A: “CURT: HOW HAVE YOUR VIEWS CHANGED?”

    —“Hey Curt. Quick question that I would like you to expand upon if you wish. Could you expand upon how your thought process has change or stayed the same from the 80s to the Curt 90s curt to the now curt doolittle?”—

    CURT

    I think my emotional intuition (what I feel good and bad about) has remained fairly constant.

    I still like to screw around as if I’m a teenager. Seriously. I would live in a dorm with college kids if I could.

    I have a lot more knowledge, and am a lot more articulate, and a lot more social than I was. I have a lot more confidence because of knowledge, ability to articulate, and social experience.

    I cared a lot (waaaay toooo much) about getting girls, then a lot about getting successful, then a lot about getting stuff, and now I don’t care about any of those things.

    I relied upon intuition, and experience, and I have abandoned all of that and I rely upon knowledge and reason mostly.

    I cared a lot about proving myself for a variety of childhood reasons. And once I did (or every time I did) I felt better and better. And I have proven myself in every dimension, and now I don’t need to.

    I think that is the major difference in how I feel. What I wish I could tell my young self is that stuff and women don’t matter – do what you love and are good at. The other things come by externality.

    Is that what you mean?

    FRIEND

    Yes for the most part.

    Thank thank you for that well worded and thought out answer.

    Also how has your view of the society changed? Or was it that you viewed society through the lenses of which you just stated

    CURT

    I was a typical classical liberal with faith in democracy and rule of law, and my only belief was that monarchy and a parliament was better than the presidency and a house of commons.

    I had greater faith in mankind – I was more optimistic, because I lacked the experience of the world to know the full range of how people can act.

    I am much more forgiving of people because I understand how diverse our abilities are. And I have a fonder appreciation for the working and middle classes, and I have lost all respect for the talking and educated classes.

    I was part of the generation indoctrinated in to feminism, and I ‘bought it’ and it turns out everything I was told was false.

    I dunno. I have always been a bit ‘afraid’ of people because social anxiety runs in my family. and I have a touch of autism that makes it worse. I’ve always been an outsider because of these things. So I don’t know if my perspective is something that can be learned from.

    I would say my swing has mostly been from confused arrogance, to understanding confidence.

    FRIEND

    wow thank you for that. Great stuff and well thought out and stated as always.

    i think you should share this with your readers if you haven’t already.

    xcheers brotha


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 13:55:00 UTC

  • “Power seeks argument. It is up to some of us to produce the argumentative weapo

    “Power seeks argument. It is up to some of us to produce the argumentative weapons that those who can exert power seek.”


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 11:43:00 UTC

  • IMHO Spencer should stay ON MESSAGE: “Yes we are genetically and culturally diff

    IMHO Spencer should stay ON MESSAGE: “Yes we are genetically and culturally different. We built the ancient, and the modern worlds, and you are mere riders on our train. Yes we didn’t do it perfectly, but at least we did it – and you didn’t. It certainly appears you couldn’t. And even today you resist everything about us that made your luxury possible.”

    Public Intellectuals Need A Very Small list of messages. The smaller the better. And to stay on message. (I know mine: truth is enough).

    I don’t agree with Spencer’s approach since as far as I can tell any tribe can adopt aristocracy and achieve what we have done in a few generations (century or so). At least the Chinese think on that time scale. But that said, don’t shoot yourself by over-reaching.

    Knowledge of one domain is not commutable to another.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 11:00:00 UTC

  • COURSE OUTLINE IN NATUAL LAW (RULE) ( I SCARED MYSELF ) (I dunno which is more f

    https://propertarianism.com/2017/03/30/the-courses-in-natural-law-propertarianism/FULL COURSE OUTLINE IN NATUAL LAW (RULE)

    ( I SCARED MYSELF )

    (I dunno which is more frightening: the fact that it’s so much work to produce and teach(administer), or the fact that I know enough about the scope of human knowledge that I can teach all these classes. I guess having a scary memory is a good thing.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-31 10:49:00 UTC