Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-15 05:06:00 UTC

  • Curt Doolittle shared a post

    Curt Doolittle shared a post.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-15 05:05:00 UTC

  • Untitled

    http://www.sciencedump.com/content/people-who-use-emojis-lot-are-hornier-according-scienceOMG.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-15 05:03:00 UTC

  • ***”Internal consistency is insufficient for truth propositions in non axiomatic

    ***”Internal consistency is insufficient for truth propositions in non axiomatic systems without external correspondence to replace those axioms with limits.”***

    That sentence is extremely powerful.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-15 03:50:00 UTC

  • TO THE FINAL WORD ON ETHICAL SYSTEMS? —“My philosophical problem with conseque

    http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2016/01/14/intentional-abuse-of-ethical-systems-as-a-means-of-parasitism-2/CLOSE TO THE FINAL WORD ON ETHICAL SYSTEMS?

    —“My philosophical problem with consequentialism is it’s lacking solid base.”— A Friend (Free Northerner)

    I’d like to give you a different suggestion.

    That we practice four levels of ethics depending upon the skill in the area of our actions.

    1) Pedagogical Myths…(very young)…………..Stories (WESTERN PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM)

    2) Virtue Ethics………….(young)………………….Biographies

    3) Rule Ethics……………(inexperience adult)…Laws

    4) Outcome Ethics……..(experienced adult)….Science

    But more importantly, ethical systems can be used as an excuse to steal. We are aware that altrusim can be abused easily. This is why I always suggest we test ethical statements for both the obverse (what is stated) and the reverse (what is not stated).

    So the lower the precision (information content) of the ethical system, the more opportunity there is to claim that one is ethical while acting unethically.

    My argument is that rothbardian libertarianism is built on this principle.

    So instead I argue that we must use the most sophisticated (informationally dense) ethical system that we can, given our abilities, and fall back if we lack it.

    ARTIFICIAL DISTINCTION FALLACY

    So there is no difference in ethical models, only a difference in our skill level in any given area of thought. And that all ethical systems are simply increasingly precise variations on the same theory that we must achieve our greatest potential but do so without externalizing costs.

    “SOLID BASE”

    Therefore all ethical systems have a ‘solid base’. Impose no cost, and in particular impose no cost that will cost YOU due to retaliation by physical means(violence), procedural means(restitution), or normative means (reputation that costs you opportunities).

    The method of imposing no cost on others is to limit ones actions that impose no involuntary costs, and engage in actions that impose costs only if they are product of, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary, and free of imposition of cost by externality.

    As far as I know this is the correction of the artificial distinction between ethical systems. There is none. There are only different rules we can follow (techniques) given the information at our disposal.

    SEE:

    INTENTIONAL ABUSES OF RULE ETHICAL SYSTEMS

    http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2016/01/14/intentional-abuse-of-ethical-systems-as-a-means-of-parasitism-2/

    THE FALLACY OF “FREE TRADE ABSOLUTISM” AS PATHOLOGICAL ALTRUISM

    http://www.propertarianism.com/en_US/2015/11/07/the-fallacy-of-free-trade-absolutism/

    Please keep up your good work. I enjoy Free Northerner.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-15 02:28:00 UTC

  • “Religion’s “warranty” is unverifiable (unobservable afterlife or reincarnation)

    —“Religion’s “warranty” is unverifiable (unobservable afterlife or reincarnation).”— Steve Pender

    Productive, Fully Informed, Warrantied, Voluntary Transfer consisting only of externalities of the same.

    Violates the rule of warranty.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 13:50:00 UTC

  • OPINION HAS NO IMPACT ON TRUTH. we use the words ‘true’ or ‘true for me’ incorre

    OPINION HAS NO IMPACT ON TRUTH.

    we use the words ‘true’ or ‘true for me’ incorrectly.

    I believe something sufficiently for action. That is belief. It is not truth.

    If it’s true regardless of what you believe, such that it cannot be false, that is truth.

    ***”Mass opinion creates mass opinion. the Laws of the universe, logic, mathematics, and human behavior do not care for mass opinion. Truth is truth. Opinion is opinion. preference is preference. hallucination is hallucination. lie is lie. Using the word truth to describe anything but truth is either error, wishful thinking, or lie.”***

    -curt

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 11:02:00 UTC

  • ISLAM AS INFANTILIZATION OF THE HUMAN MIND —–He proceeds to “list a few of th

    ISLAM AS INFANTILIZATION OF THE HUMAN MIND

    —–He proceeds to “list a few of their habits which Arabs are known for.” His subheadings include: “A lack of privacy for other’s space,” “Childish behavior,” “Stealing shoes,” “Etiquettes when eating,” “Getting angry” “Sleeping habits,” “The staring competition,” “Treating animals badly,” “Beggars,” “Driving ‘skills’,” and “Empty words.” —-

    Damn. Thats it you know. It’s not just ignorance but infantilization as the result of imposed ignorance.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 09:16:00 UTC

  • IF YOU CAN’T DEFEND IT THEN WHY DO YOU ADVOCATE IT? — You are not making reaso

    IF YOU CAN’T DEFEND IT THEN WHY DO YOU ADVOCATE IT?

    — You are not making reasonable arguments —

    Translated: “I am too ignorant to understand what you’re saying”.

    Uh huh. I”m one of the best living and working moral philosophers.

    Either you can make an argument or you can’t. If you can’t that’s fine. But all categories are judged by the main, not the margins. And your attempt to suggest that some outlier is meaningful, is like me stating that a statistical irrelevance is meaningful. It’s not. Its just an act of deception.

    We do not judge an individual by the properties of the class, we judge a class by the properties of the individuals. Else racism is rational.

    As a class, islam is demonstrably a force for ignorance and poverty and conflcit in this world. Until it no longer is a force for ignorance and poverty and conflict in this world, and the most backward civilization on earth, there are not redeeming categorical virtues.

    So you might say that these PEOPLE who happen to be muslims might be ok, but you cannot say that Islam is ok under any circumstances.

    We are all in a world war against islam just as we were in a world war against communism. Why? Because islam is as destructive to the mind, as communism was to the economy.

    That you lack the requisite knowledge to engage in this discussion should be evidence to you that you are not in a position to advocate one of the great evils of human history.

    You do not know yet that you are a pawn because of your lack of sophistication. But as a specialist in truth I do.

    You are selling mental cancer as a cure. You are no different than the distributor of muslim heroin with the promise of temporary experiential joy at the cost of long term demise.

    This is what it is. You are an evil man whether you know it or not.

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 08:50:00 UTC

  • CAN I FIND A VOLUNTEER FOR THE WEBSITE MAYBE? The last time I updated my article

    CAN I FIND A VOLUNTEER FOR THE WEBSITE MAYBE?

    The last time I updated my articles-organized-by-chapter was in June. Starting in July and August I was less disciplined about monthly migration of my facebook posts to the web site.

    So I would like a victim (volunteer) who might be willing to work backward through my posts to July 1st, search for them on my site, and to send me a list of posts that are not on the web site. all I need is a text file with a list of links.

    Now please do not respond to this impulsively and disappoint both of us. I write around 100 things a month at times. And the website is not fast when performing searches. So this is something you can do while watching tv or something, but it is not something that can be done quickly.

    So, it might be better to just choose one month, and do that, and let someone else do another. So Multiple volunteers would be even better. And if you finish one and still are willing to do another that’s great.

    I suspect that I have about 80-90% of the posts captured, but I am very skeptical about September and October because I was under a great deal of stress.

    Please PM me (message) if you’re willing to do a month. Don’t respond here.

    Note that I only transfer articles of philosophy, not humor and sarcasm and diary entries. But if it’s hard to choose just include it.

    Thanks all.

    Curt Doolittle

    Source date (UTC): 2016-01-14 08:42:00 UTC