Source: Facebook

  • Q&A: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY LOADING, FRAMING, AND OVERLOADING? —“Curt, you talk a

    Q&A: WHAT DO YOU MEAN BY LOADING, FRAMING, AND OVERLOADING?

    —“Curt, you talk about ‘loading and framing’ a lot. I have an idea of what you are talking about, but I’m wondering if you could provide a link to something to help me flesh out my understanding of the topic.”— Ed Hertzog

    Ed Hertzog:

    Great Question.

    -Framing:-

    There are a limited number of causal axis the mind can resolve into a consistent judgement without falling back on introspection – in other words, it is easy to overload our ability to reason with causal density.

    When we are overloaded by the frame, we abandon reason and resort to intuition – moral intuition.

    When we resort to moral intuition we resort to our metaphysical value judgements.

    This is a form of suggestion. Humans are very suggestible. Tremendously so. Do some research. Reason is limited. That’s why we had to invent math, logic, and science.

    (Hence why I constructed Testimonialism scientifically)

    -Loading-

    Loading is the art of attaching value judgements to facts. This is another form of suggestion. Because communication requires we use a sympathetic process, it is possible to use suggestion to load an argument with value judgements.

    (Hence why I constructed propertarianism amorally.)

    -Overloading-

    Saturating the discourse, or environment, with propaganda, or false-evidence. False propaganda is inexpensive under mass communication, and defeating fallacious arguments is expensive. We are subject to environmental suggestion.

    (Hence why I have outlawed unscientific political speech from the commons.)

    Protect the informational commons using the same rule of law we use to protect all other commons – including property rights themselves.

    You can research Chomsky and Lakoff (both masters of lying, which is why they understand the topic). But you will find that they seek to USE it rather than prohibit it. I do the opposite. Prohibit it. Fraud is fraud. No matter how elegant.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 10:41:00 UTC

  • altruism” #tcit #tlot #Nrx

    http://t.co/jbKfg7uvkc”Pathological altruism” #tcit #tlot #Nrx


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 09:28:00 UTC

  • (We all have mental self images. I still think of myself as the kid in the mirro

    (We all have mental self images. I still think of myself as the kid in the mirror when I was 19. And it’s still strange to me when people call me Mr Doolittle. I keep thinking their talking to my grandfather. Mom says I am peter pan. I never wanted to grow up. It seemed pointlessly difficult to be an adult. Maybe that’s why I wanted to earn fortunes: so I could be peter pan. Probably. ) 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 03:21:00 UTC

  • THE JUSTIFICATION FOR OUR REVOLUTION. As a philosopher I don’t have to fantasize

    THE JUSTIFICATION FOR OUR REVOLUTION.

    As a philosopher I don’t have to fantasize – I try to understand and describe causes. Propertarianism is descriptive.

    That is because, like all philosophers who bridge one era and the next, it is from decline and failure that we can determine our prior successes.

    From industrial decline we see medieval and ancient success.

    And then we describe and outlaw the evils of the prior era that caused us to lose our way.

    I will outlaw deceit – Anglo, German and Jewish.

    I will incrementally increase the suppression of new modes of parasitism.

    Western philosophy is expressed as law. Everything else is expressed as either religion or aesthetics.

    And with that increase in suppression of deceit, we will transform the world as greatly as the transformation from mysticism to moralism, moralism to rationalism, rationalism to science.

    Because we will render ethics and politics as science for the fist time in human history.

    If that isn’t a profound ambition sufficient to justify our revolution then I do not know what else could be.

    Curt Doolittle

    The philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    Kiev, Ukraine.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 02:44:00 UTC

  • Do we build commons because of aesthetic bias? Because of status? As civic spiri

    Do we build commons because of aesthetic bias? Because of status? As civic spirituality? It is a tremendous advantage.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 02:27:00 UTC

  • TODAY’S INSIGHTS Just when you think you are done you hop in the shower and have

    TODAY’S INSIGHTS

    Just when you think you are done you hop in the shower and have two insights.

    1) add hazard: productive, fully informed, warrantied, voluntary exchange free of hazard and free of externality by the same criteria.

    2) My friend Josh has helped me understand that after Propertarianism and testimonialism, that all of philosophy is now a science – other than aesthetics, which is preference. And that this is the fallacy of the continentals: conflating aesthetic preferences with metaphysics, epistemology, ethics and politics.

    This, along with the understanding that the nazi movement was an aesthetic one helps me see what as an American I could not: the dominance of aesthetics in European thought. And the use of aesthetics as authoritarian persuasion. Which is enough of a topic that I must go research it.

    Because it’s profound.

    Beauty as cultural mandate.

    Brilliant.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-08 02:19:00 UTC

  • (I don’t see christian africans of any continent as competitors but allies. I do

    (I don’t see christian africans of any continent as competitors but allies. I don’t see jews as competitors but dependents. I see Russians, muslims, Chinese as competitors if not outright enemies. )


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-07 08:24:00 UTC

  • THE FUTURE “The browser is the operating system, and Oversing not just an applic

    THE FUTURE

    “The browser is the operating system, and Oversing not just an application – it is the user interface to the organization.”


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-07 07:33:00 UTC

  • ARISTOCRATIA —“I am not interested in your consent. I am not interested in you

    ARISTOCRATIA

    —“I am not interested in your consent. I am not interested in your approval. I am interested in your defeat, as a demonstration of the superiority of the character, taste, ideas and actions of me and my peers.”—


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-07 07:30:00 UTC

  • YOU DIDN’T READ THIS THE FIRST TIME, READ IT NOW

    http://www.propertarianism.com/2015/09/26/the-three-weapons-of-influence-and-the-evolution-of-laws/IF YOU DIDN’T READ THIS THE FIRST TIME, READ IT NOW


    Source date (UTC): 2015-10-07 07:27:00 UTC