Source: Facebook

  • MARKET VS ARMY Oliver: Family, tribe, market (speed), vs army and corporation (p

    MARKET VS ARMY

    Oliver:

    Family, tribe, market (speed), vs army and corporation (power).

    This question has been around forever.

    Welcome to the desert of the real. (so to speak)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-25 12:12:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-25 12:06:00 UTC

  • Molyneux (Moulineaux) and Doolittle (De Dolietta) are anglicizations of Norman (

    Molyneux (Moulineaux) and Doolittle (De Dolietta) are anglicizations of Norman (French) names. The Moulineux’s originate from the Siene river farther east, and De Dolietta from further west near Avranches.

    It’s gotta be genetic.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 14:42:00 UTC

  • (my favorite coffee shop has wifi again! the small things that make life grand.

    (my favorite coffee shop has wifi again! the small things that make life grand. lol)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 14:30:00 UTC

  • EDUCATION: RETURNING TO RULE Our ‘Education’, back when only the aristocracy and

    EDUCATION: RETURNING TO RULE

    Our ‘Education’, back when only the aristocracy and its imitators could obtain an education, was not to manage, as was true in the as through the 19th century; was not to teach one to be an employee, or labor as it was in the early 20th, or a tax slave, as it become in the mid 20th through today, but to RULE over Territory, military, production, and family, successfully.

    There is no reason we cannot return to our traditional profession: RULE. And there is no reason we cannot return to teaching how to rule.

    1) Fitness, Hunting, Sport, Games, and War? Absolutely.

    2) Economics, Ethics, Natural Law, Contracts, Institutions, Group Strategy? Of necessity.

    3) Reading, Arithmetic, Accounting, Mathematics, Programming, Engineering and Physics? Hmm. Only basics.

    4) Aesthetics, Art, Myth, Literature, History? it can’t hurt.

    5) Psychology, Sociology, Politics? It’s a waste of time – its false.

    6) Religion, Philosophy, Pseudoscience? It can only hurt.

    THE RESTORATION IS SIMPLE.

    RETURN TO OUR MAJOR INDUSTRY AND EXPORT: RULE.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 13:02:00 UTC

  • GOOD, HAD TO RE-SHARE

    https://propertarianism.com/2016/12/09/correcting-aristotles-categories-of-philosophy/SO GOOD, HAD TO RE-SHARE


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 12:44:00 UTC

  • DEFINITION: FICTIONALISM (important for propertarian core) Fictionalism is the n

    DEFINITION: FICTIONALISM

    (important for propertarian core)

    Fictionalism is the name of the judgement within philosophy, as to which statements that appear to be descriptions of the world should not be construed as such, but should instead be understood as cases of “make believe”, of pretending to treat something as literally true (a “useful fiction”).

    Fictionalism consists in at least the following three theses:

    1) Claims made within the domain of discourse are taken to be truth-apt; that is, descriptive or fictional, and honest or deceitful, and true or false.

    2) The domain of discourse is to be interpreted at face value—not reduced to meaning something else: conversation(bonding or entertainment), discourse (discovery), argument(persuasion), and testimony(reporting), differ substantially in the contractual commitments to one another as to the degree of description vs fiction, honesty vs deceit, and truth or falsehood, of our statements. (We white and grey lie all time time in conversation, and we do no such thing in testimony.)

    3) The purpose of *discourse(discovery)* in any given domain is not truth, but communication. Whether descriptive or fictional, honest or deceptive, true or false.

    Four common occurrences of fictionalism are:

    1) mathematical fictionalism advocated by Hartry Field, which states that talk of numbers and other mathematical objects is nothing more than a verbal convenience for performing their science. (the logic of constant relations: measurement)

    2) modal fictionalism developed by Gideon Rosen, which states that possible worlds, regardless of whether they exist or not, may be a part of a useful discourse, and;

    3) moral fictionalism in meta-ethics, advocated by Richard Joyce, suggests that fictions (Falsehoods) are too useful to throw out.

    4) religious fiction in all areas of thought – our most ancient form of fictionalism.

    5) Aesthetic Fictionalism (In the arts, in experience, in the new age, and in the occult)

    We must note that all three of these claims are just excuses for doing what has been done in the past.

    Of these groups:

    0 – Religious Language in toto (supernaturalism)

    1 – Literary Philosophers (positive, or advocates ),

    2 – Supernormal Physicists, and

    3 – Mathematical Platonists;

    All attempt to preserve the use of fictions for one of the following possible reasons:

    1) To conduct deceptions by claiming their arbitrary preferences or judgements are truths.

    2) Obscure their ignorance of causality and decidability in their disciplines, or

    3) Preserve the cost of their investments in obscurantist fictional descriptions, or

    4) Avoid the costs of investigating the method of decidability within their domains.

    5) Avoid the falsification of their arguments if methods of decidability within their domains are discovered.

    If we define philosophy (positive and literary) as the search for methods of decidability within a domain of preference, and

    if we define truth as the search for methods of decidability across all domains regardless of preference.

    Then:

    We find that positive or literary philosophy(fiction or philosophy) informs, suggests opportunities, and justifies preferences for the purpose of forming cooperation and alliances between individuals and groups.

    We find that negative or juridical philosophy(truth or law) decides, states limits, and discounts preferences, for the purpose of resolving conflicts between individuals and groups.

    Natural Law (propertarianism), is a negative, descriptive, juridical science, not a .fictional literature.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 11:43:00 UTC

  • WHO IS CURT DOOLITTLE, IS HE AN ECONOMIST, AND WHY DOES HE TALK ABOUT ECONOMICS?

    WHO IS CURT DOOLITTLE, IS HE AN ECONOMIST, AND WHY DOES HE TALK ABOUT ECONOMICS?

    (From elsewhere)(meant as an insult)

    (RESPONSE: Philosopher of science: social science, natural law, testimony, and epistemology: Truth. My criticisms of economics are in the context of the truth or falsehood of economic propositions given the state of immaturity of the discipline. And you are welcome to attempt to find any economist who will debate me on any subject in the discipline. But you will find that most economists are only adequate mathematicians and inadequate philosophers, and that truth is a specialization in itself. 😉 ).


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 07:48:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-24 07:24:00 UTC

  • Donald O’Brien shared a post to your timeline

    Donald O’Brien shared a post to your timeline.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-03-23 20:01:00 UTC