Source: Facebook

  • HEGEL RIGHT, OR IS THE ANSWER MUCH MORE SIMPLE?

    http://www.eurocanadian.ca/2014/10/hegel-and-progression-of-western-spirit.htmlIS HEGEL RIGHT, OR IS THE ANSWER MUCH MORE SIMPLE?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-07 12:44:00 UTC

  • Information is the correct metaphor. I am not certain we can improve upon our cu

    Information is the correct metaphor. I am not certain we can improve upon our current understanding of knowledge as information – meaning necessary to change state – and I am not certain that we can improve upon what is currently called the scientific method – except that if we introduce costs and objective morality into the set of warranties, it would serve as the universal method for warrantied theories. I am more concerned now that we have largely managed to eliminate bias and error, that we eliminate bias, deception, fraud and theft from theories – at which point all human knowledge can be judged by the same means regardless of discipline.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-07 09:30:00 UTC

  • BUT SINCE YOU GAVE ME AN EXCUSE TO RIDICULE ARGUMENTATION ETHICS I HAVE TO SEIZE

    BUT SINCE YOU GAVE ME AN EXCUSE TO RIDICULE ARGUMENTATION ETHICS I HAVE TO SEIZE IT.

    Argumentation ethics relies on the weapon of contradiction. This mighty weapon works precisely nowhere except in a court where property is based upon high trust moral constraint that is itself impossible under rothbardian ethics. (That is a lovely contradiction.)

    Argumentation ethics are nonsense. Property rights exist as a property of contractual relations. In the absence of contractual relations, violence is our greatest competitive asset. Libertarians (Libertines) attempt to escape the high cost of using violence. They do this for a variety of reasons. FOr self congratualtory imaginary status. To escape their powerless inferiority. To avoid the cost of policing using violence. To avoid the risk of applying violence. In other words, libertines conduct a fraud – free riding by fraud.

    Certainly progressives don’t care about argumentation. Certainly conservatives advance and use violence. But just like libertines, progressives attempt to free ride. TO gain status over their superiors who make their privileges possible by the organized use of violence.

    Under Propertarian ethics and Aristocratic Egalitarianism, the use of violence to actively suppress, institute property rights throughout the scale, and demand truth-speaking, is a defensive, moral and wise, activity.

    And right now, WE NEED TO START USING ORGANIZED VIOLENCE TO SAVE OUR PEOPLE


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-07 08:27:00 UTC

  • (Massive doses of vitamin D, followed by allergy pills seem to do the trick for

    (Massive doses of vitamin D, followed by allergy pills seem to do the trick for me.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-07 05:52:00 UTC

  • A THEORY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JUSTIFICATION, CRITICISM AND MORALITY If em

    A THEORY OF THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN JUSTIFICATION, CRITICISM AND MORALITY

    If empiricists are correct, and that all memories are the product of observations (both internal and external), and that intuition serves as a search engine(which cognitive scientists seem to agree at present), and imagination a hypothetical engine(again a search engine), then all mental content originates with reality, all knowledge as theory, and the function of thinking, reasoning, and science are to criticize imaginary intuitions, hypotheses to see if they can take the standing of theories (which is analogous to belief), and law (which is analogous to norm, ritual, or sacred tenet).

    The difference between justificationary and critical points of view buried unconsciously in our language, is that feeling, belief, knowledge and truth describe a justificationary epistemology, and intuition, hypothesis, theory and law describe a critical epistemology.

    I would add that I believe (hypothesize) justificationary epistemology is necessary in highly interdependent small polities where most reproduction and production functions as a commons in which all members are shareholders; and therefore the use of most property, is as common property, and so even normative rules (the normative commons) must be justified to others. Whereas under an advanced economy, we are individual actors, and need not justify to others how we make use of resources – only that we do no harm to them. Under both Justification and Criticism we must warranty our words and deeds. Just as we do in all of life.

    This is probably the correct interpretation of why we evolved from systems of beliefs (justifications within a commons) to systems of theories (criticisms under individual property rights) – we must claim knowledge is ethically and morally obtained and practiced. But what constitutes moral action changes as property is increasingly privatized. We move from needing permission to use property, to not. But in the process, we increasingly privatize responsibility for our actions as well.

    It appears that all justification and criticism are merely the conditions of warranty under different structures of property. And that we have increasingly applied our cooperative methodology to those areas of the world where cooperation is no longer involved.

    In other words, it was necessary to privatize property to gain the normative permission to seek the truth. Having privatized it, we have now obtained a condition where we see that the only truth possible is critical. And having abandoned morality from the pursuit of truth, it appears I am unconsciously, unknowingly, and unwittingly, reinserting it into the search for truth as a constraint upon the externalities produced by our search, in an effort to constrain people who would take advantage of the justificationary system for criminal, unethical, and immoral purposes to which it has been put for the past century and a half.

    More to come as I drill into this further.


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-07 03:29:00 UTC

  • Ok. I give up. I can’t work today. I’m useless. (Sigh.)

    Ok. I give up. I can’t work today. I’m useless. (Sigh.)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-06 11:16:00 UTC

  • Nothing better than phone calls telling you an investment that you thought had t

    Nothing better than phone calls telling you an investment that you thought had tanked was going to pay you back entirely. 🙂 Yummy. Not a LOT of money, but enough to put a smile on my face. lol


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-06 10:12:00 UTC

  • ARE WE DUE REPARATIONS FROM SOCIALISTS? So now that we know that the cosmopolita

    ARE WE DUE REPARATIONS FROM SOCIALISTS?

    So now that we know that the cosmopolitan socialists and neo-puritans have caused this much damage to western civilization, are we due reparations? How will they provide us with restitution for their crimes?


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-06 09:11:00 UTC

  • MORAL SUPERIORITY BY REJECTION OR ACTION? Well, you can claim moral superiority

    MORAL SUPERIORITY BY REJECTION OR ACTION?

    Well, you can claim moral superiority and reject the rest of society – accomplishing nothing other than a dramatic disapproval: the equivalent of a raspberry. Or you can make a plan, rally fellow warriors, and change society to suit your will. The moral question is simple: if you seek to impose greater suppression of free riding, and increase the requirement for voluntary exchange you are in fact, increasing the moral content of society. If you are increasing predation, parasitism and free riding, then you are acting immorally. But whether you use violence to achieve either end is immaterial. Violence can be put to good (suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation) or ill (increasing free riding, parasitism and predation.) So contrary to feminine sentiment, violence not only solves most conflict, it is necessary for the solution of conflict. Violence is a virtue, if put to virtuous ends. And the suppression of free riding, parasitism and predation is a virtuous end.

    Curt Doolittle

    The Philosophy of Aristocracy

    The Propertarian Institute

    L’viv Ukraine


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-06 09:09:00 UTC

  • (fk. I am tryin’ to work here. lol)

    (fk. I am tryin’ to work here. lol)


    Source date (UTC): 2015-01-06 09:03:00 UTC