Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • MORE ON LESTER’S JUSTIFICATIONARY NONSENSE. (archived from elsewhere) Lee ie: Un

    MORE ON LESTER’S JUSTIFICATIONARY NONSENSE.

    (archived from elsewhere)

    Lee

    ie: Unless you or anyone else can demonstrate that our cooperative emotions (moral intuitions), and our pre-cooperative emotions, that inform us (reward and punish us) for acquisition and defense of that which we have born costs to hold or obtain – physical costs – then no, it is IMPOSSIBLE for a pre-propertarian cause of liberty. Period. It is however, possible to state, that our satisfaction or distress is dependent upon the imposition of costs by others.

    So. No. Sorry. Lesterianism = Tautology. A “Word Game”.

    The operational definition of liberty is a condition in which interpersonal moral constraints, are enforced upon political organizations. Where moral constraints prohibit imposition of costs (free riding). Where costs are imposed upon one’s property.

    Property rights are a contract for insurance by others that limits the enforcement of the prohibition on the imposition of costs to those that are disruptive to the reproductive, productive, and institutional orders.

    Motion, Memory, Acquisitiveness, Subjective Value, Property, Cooperation, Morality, Property Rights and Liberty, all refer to a sequence of sets of necessary properties, and are invariant no matter how you verbalize them, from which observer’s perspective you verbalize them, and how you verbally justify them.

    Lester gave us another bit of rationalist nonsense to use as justification, but it’s just another bit of rationalist nonsense to use as justification, and not a description of necessary and sufficient causal relations.

    It’s intellectually embarrassing really. But then, an awful lot of libertarian tripe is intellectually embarrassing. Because nearly all political tripe is intellectually embarrassing justification for obtaining what our reproductive strategies demand of us.

    There is no exit from the box. As far as I can tell this is a settled question.

    Cheers.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-04 02:19:00 UTC

  • THE WELL READ LIFE (worth repeating)

    THE WELL READ LIFE

    (worth repeating)

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-04 00:04:00 UTC

  • Don Finnegan. Thank you for putting a seed in my head in Bodrum, way back when.

    Don Finnegan. Thank you for putting a seed in my head in Bodrum, way back when. Owe you forever.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-03 16:00:00 UTC

  • Can’t write any philosophy. None. Can’t. Need a dedicated brain. And the busines

    Can’t write any philosophy. None. Can’t. Need a dedicated brain. And the business is using all of what little I’ve got. 🙂 I barely have time for reading the economics blogs and keeping up with the news.

    Playing the rationalist game is a convenient distraction – sort of like investigating mathematics. It’s interesting. You feel like you’re doing something. It’s fun to engage in social contact on topics that you care about. But it’s not really productive.

    Why? Because explaining why economics and politics, morality and philosophy and the physical sciences were artificially separated is interesting. And collapsing science and philosophy into truth telling solves a lot of problems. The fundamental issue that I must deal with is institutions.

    Maybe it is a good thing that I take a step back for a bit and admit that I was having more fun making minor improvements in my arguments, than doing serious work for the past few months. And that maybe my concern over diving in to something as serious as institutions – even if I thought I understood that first, is something I’m afraid of getting absorbed into with so much on my plate.

    I have this terrible emotional desire to put more bullets in rationalism. But that’s, I think, late-life work. I think, at this point I need to stay on the innovations that matter to the movements ; to the post-NRx, Post-Libertine movements – whatever they might be called.

    But to save one’s people. To save the mind of one’s people. It requires something momentous. Testimonial Truth, Science as the discipline of truth speaking, scientific invention as the result of truth telling, and the entire propertarian artifice are momentous.

    And they are now developed to a point where informed and interested people can make use of them. So I must finish institutions and applications.

    Because understanding is not action. To act we must have a solution to demand, and one that we may implement by force if needed. With full moral authority before man, god and the judgment of history.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-03 15:50:00 UTC

  • CEO: “5.5% UNEMPLOYMENET IS A BIG LIE”

    http://www.gallup.com/opinion/chairman/181469/big-lie-unemployment.aspxGALLUP CEO: “5.5% UNEMPLOYMENET IS A BIG LIE”

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-03 15:03:00 UTC

  • TRUE NAMES OF THINGS VERSUS NAMES OF OUR EXPERIENCES OF THEM If you can name a t

    TRUE NAMES OF THINGS VERSUS NAMES OF OUR EXPERIENCES OF THEM

    If you can name a thing. You can be free of, control, or kill a thing. Because to know the true name of a thing, is to know the cause and consequence of its existence, cleansed of imaginary information. We use many names. But most of our names are analogies to our own subjective experiences, rather than operational descriptions of the means by which things exist, change, and cease to exist. Meaning is cheap. Names of experiences are descriptions of how we feel, not the nature of the thing itself. Names of the actions needed to create, change, and uncreate something, tell us not what we imagine, not what we experience, but what exists.

    The liars seduce us with meaning – cheapness.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-03 04:00:00 UTC

  • LOADING AND FRAMING You can load and frame with reason – that’s what we use it f

    LOADING AND FRAMING

    You can load and frame with reason – that’s what we use it for: moral persuasion.

    You can load, frame and obscure with rationalism – it’s easy, that’s what rationalism is for.

    You can load and frame science – it’s much harder, but it can be done.

    But it’s very, very hard to load and frame analytic logic, although obscurantism is still common.

    It’s almost impossible to load, frame and obscure operational definitions.

    And Propertarianism is a formal logic of operational definitions.

    That’s why Propertarianism is so frustrating to Libertines.

    It’s shows how they load, frame, and obscure their misrepresentation of man.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-02 08:29:00 UTC

  • “There is room in the market for a high end product.”— 🙂 Yep. Oversing

    —“There is room in the market for a high end product.”—

    🙂 Yep. Oversing.

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-02 08:23:00 UTC

  • If someone Ridicules, Gossips, Rallies and Shames us as a means of obscuring the

    If someone Ridicules, Gossips, Rallies and Shames us as a means of obscuring their thefts and their lies, why are we not in the right to use violence against them? Isn’t truthfulness in argument required for us to eschew violence and enter into mutually productive, cooperative debate? Why can people attempt to create taboos to obscure their lies and thefts?

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-01 11:44:00 UTC

  • “I don’t disagree with Miller’s multiple “standards of justice”. I just would st

    —“I don’t disagree with Miller’s multiple “standards of justice”. I just would state ‘standards of justice’ very differently, using the terms: necessities, demands, incentives, and evolutionary strategies. So, I say the same thing. I just say it very differently. 🙂 That said, a standard of logical decidability in all matters is provided by one universal moral rule: voluntary exchange – but we can build infinitely complex systems upon it. That one rule provides us with Decidability in law regardless of construction of social norms, and that single, necessary inescapable, universal logical test is very different from the contractual terms by which we construct social orders out of various exchanges, and inside of which we produce multiple standards of justice.”—

    Source date (UTC): 2015-02-01 11:36:00 UTC