Source: Facebook

  • THE HIERARCHY OF COMMUNICATION METHODS Testimonial (causal) …. Scientific (cor

    THE HIERARCHY OF COMMUNICATION METHODS

    Testimonial (causal)

    …. Scientific (correlative)

    …. …. Historical (analogistic)

    …. …. …. Literary (allegorical)

    …. …. …. …. Mythical (super human)

    …. …. …. …. …. Platonist (super normal)

    …. …. …. …. …. …. Theological (super natural)

    …. …. …. …. …. …. …. Occult ( super-rational / dream state)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 16:15:00 UTC

  • JAMES ON CONFLATION > DECEPTION > UNEARNED DISCOUNT (THEFT) (behold the parsimon

    JAMES ON CONFLATION > DECEPTION > UNEARNED DISCOUNT (THEFT)

    (behold the parsimony of genius)

    By James Augustus

    Propertarian Heuristic: where one observes conflation, one is likely to observe some degree of deception.

    Corollary: where one observes deception, one is likely to observe some dimension of discount-seeking (parasitism).

    And that can apply to:

    (a) conflation as substitution for understanding of existential operations (seeking discounts on intellectual authority), and;

    (b) conflation as means of limiting the scope of information considered on matters that require decidability (seeking discounts on exchange/cooperation).


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 16:00:00 UTC

  • WHAT DOES ‘AGENCY’ MEAN? “In social science, agency is the capacity of individua

    WHAT DOES ‘AGENCY’ MEAN?

    “In social science, agency is the capacity of individuals to act independently and to make their own free choices.”

    in practical terms it is an attempt by social scientists to find another name for the (heavily tainted, if not entirely polluted, and therefore unusable) term ‘free will’.

    Wiki is your friend:

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agency_(sociology)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 15:55:00 UTC

  • I START WITH TIME. Time is the only existential commodity available to man, and

    I START WITH TIME.

    Time is the only existential commodity available to man, and all our divisions of perception, cognition, knowledge, labor, negotiation, and advocacy serve to produce and distribute calories in various states in ever shorter time. I try to teach people to think in terms of time, where money serves as a store of accumulated time, and debt, promised time. Ergo, we are not wealthier than cave men, we have just made everything infinitely cheaper to acquire with our time. So I start from the basics of time, acquisitionism, cooperation, and competition, and build up from the problem of using memory and reason to defeat the dark forces of time and ignorance.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 15:38:00 UTC

  • YES, WOMEN ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY FROM MEN (because they behave differently fro

    YES, WOMEN ARE TREATED DIFFERENTLY FROM MEN

    (because they behave differently from men)

    Kimberley O’Brien: —“Men are treated differently than women. I named the areas within which equality need happen. You’re triggered, angry, for no reason related to me.”—-

    Yes women are treated with material privilege at all times but treated with suspicion of loyalty and agency at all times. Which again, you demonstrate.

    Women are demonstrably less loyal, destroy each other in the workplace, hen peck for advancement, readily make use of manipulation in the work place, are less empirical, less theoretical, and less neutral in decision making, and are widely unwanted as managers by both sexes.

    The evidence is that women are relatively poor empirical executives but can be successful relationship executives (customer relations). At the limits of ability almost without exception, worldwide, in every single theatre and discipline, men outperform women dramatically, simply because at the higher end, the ratio of competent men, who area also loyal, neutral, and empirical is so high as to make women by and large statistically insignificant. By the data on intelligence alone, we should never see women raise above the single digits in the most demanding of roles in society.

    in fact, when women are placed in executive roles it is because it is easier to find a woman who will manage a company through failure, or when in board roles what we see is women as a luxury good who adds value only in consumer products where women are the majority customer base.

    All of this occurs even before the recognition that women prefer a wider array of ‘goods’ in their lives, and are less likely to specialize, and demonstrate behavioral side effects, choose the cushiest and lowest risk jobs leaving the high risk to males, thereby pushing males out of the middle ‘cushy’ workplace, into the higher competitive top, more stressful and strenuous lower, and most risky lowest jobs – which of course, no feminist ever accounts for. Because women are creatures of selfishness that never extends beyond their children. And men are creatures of the tribe whose selfishness extends at least to that distance.

    These are just facts. I have not only followed the research and findings for decades, but run my own companies, and consulted for hundreds more, and the data is the same: women gather information from people better, and men interpret empirical information better, and decide better neutrally, and manage better neutrally. Why? we have infinitely less emotional baggage in our decision making.

    A baggage which you demonstrate.

    And willfully ignore.

    And then lie about.

    This is the LOYAL, NEUTRAL, EMPIRICAL, TRUTH.

    WHich is why you fear it.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 15:11:00 UTC

  • AND THE CURRENCY OF AFFECTION FOR THE OTHER .. Ultimately it is our mortality th

    https://propertarianism.com/2014/09/28/the-evolution-of-cooperation/SCARCITY AND THE CURRENCY OF AFFECTION FOR THE OTHER

    ..

    Ultimately it is our mortality that gives us a meaningful sense of time. The fact that life will end for all of us, and its reality is ever present as a probability percentage, no matter how low or high.

    ..

    (Affection and some of its forms: Compassion, Empathy, Nurture, Respect, etc.)

    ..

    Given this inescapable biological truth, and without entertaining transhumanism, we must acknowledge that while our time is limited so too is our capacity to extend affection to the Other. At first glance this may appear to be radically insignificant, but its implications are vast and stand in stark contrast to the dangerous ideas of our day. I put emphasis on the word “dangerous” because when an ideological framework insists that any human emotion, burdened by the very real constraints of biology, are somehow infinitely unrestricted, it necessarily creates expectations that will forever be unrealized and guide human behavior irresponsibly. In the same way, I may plant 50 carrot seeds and expect an infinite number of carrots to yield, without respect to how long carrots take to grow, or conditions which carrots require, then I have failed to construct expectations which conform to biological reality and simultaneously succeeded in deluding myself about the nature of carrots.

    ..

    When we acknowledge that our affection exists in limited supply, or at least our capacity to express it, we can begin to ask more implicative questions.

    ..

    Who deserves or is entitled to my affection? How many people can I afford to give affection to at any one time? Is my affection given freely without respect to the actions of the Other? Can one be more or less deserving of my affection? Can unconditional affection have a sensible context? Do we give affection in degrees based on the values of the Other?

    ..

    An examination of those questions gives rise to the reality that if we value the Other, our affection must have a value of its own, and its value must be inextricably linked to who we bother giving affection to in the first place.

    ..

    We must never forget that the context of affection has always been cooperation, and that cooperation has been the only successful means at organizing civilization. Affection is a critical mechanism of cooperation, and like any valuable currency, should be budgeted wisely. How are you spending your affection? Your empathy? Your compassion? Your respect? Are you going broke? Are you investing for the future?

    ..

    To learn more about cooperation:

    https://www.facebook.com/permalink.php?story_fbid=382099852163689&id=100010910319967


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 15:00:00 UTC

  • American culture is reducible to ‘other people you consume with’ in order to con

    American culture is reducible to ‘other people you consume with’ in order to continue to build an artificial self image through acquisition.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 14:54:00 UTC

  • (I made my money with tech, understanding business is a problem of solving custo

    (I made my money with tech, understanding business is a problem of solving customer wants, learning how to sell to customers, and working my ass off – not by waiting people to come ask me for my self aggrandizing opinion. I’d be resentful as hell too. Because I had demonstrated the error of my judgement, and paid the price for it.)


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 14:48:00 UTC

  • #Libertarian #Trump #NewRight

    https://twitter.com/curtdoolittle/status/833762594703933440/photo/1?utm_source=fb&utm_medium=fb&utm_campaign=curtdoolittle&utm_content=833762594703933440#Conservative #Libertarian #Trump #NewRight https://t.co/jeWAbPxcgS


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 14:37:00 UTC

  • TESTIMONIAL: THIS IS MY TARGET AUDIENCE, EVEN IF I’D LIKE MORE REACH FROM BL Wil

    TESTIMONIAL: THIS IS MY TARGET AUDIENCE, EVEN IF I’D LIKE MORE REACH

    FROM BL Wilson

    —“I’m a MENSA member (top 2%, generally seen as minimum 138 IQ), and your writings challenge me more then anything else I’ve tried to comprehend and I have a doctorate of pharmacology degree.

    I think I’m just too lazy to USE a large, expanded vocabulary, but I do understand almost all of what you post. I also appreciate how much you interact with your followers and fans.

    Anyhow, love your stuff. Never heard of propertarianism until you and Eli Harman. Always wanting to learn more.”—- BL Wilson

    YOU SHOULD MAKE SURE YOU FOLLOW ELI

    Eli is much, much better than I am at teaching propertarianism and I probably (out of not wanting to impose upon the man I consider my partner) don’t push more people to him first.

    It actually bothers me that I don’t have more reach, but so many people volunteer to increase that reach that it isn’t necessary. So while I don’t take incomprehensibility as a criticism, I still wish I could.

    I don’t like to name names or show favoritism mostly because it seems to alter the behavior of my best followers, but the if you read the comments even casually you’ll see who else to follow.

    We have people across the spectrum.

    We are achieving our goals.


    Source date (UTC): 2017-02-20 14:34:00 UTC