Curt Doolittle

Source: Facebook

  • SCIENCE AND THE THEORY OF ACTION : ACTIONS DEMARCATE THE REAL FROM THE UNREAL In

    SCIENCE AND THE THEORY OF ACTION : ACTIONS DEMARCATE THE REAL FROM THE UNREAL

    In praxeology, if statements cannot be expressed as human actions that are open to sympathetic testing of the rationality of incentives then the statements are not ‘scientific’.

    OPERATIONAL DEFINITIONS: (Operationalism) Operational definitions are definitions of theoretical constructs that are stated in terms of concrete, observable procedures (Actions). Operational definitions solve the problem of what is not directly observable by connecting unobservable traits or experiences to things that can be observed. Operational definitions make the unobservable observable. ( the concepts or terms used in nonanalytic scientific statements must be definable in terms of identifiable and repeatable operations.)

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 12:34:00 UTC

  • DIALOG ON RACE WITH CLINTON : CIRCULAR LOGIC Listen. I know that solving the pro

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwlEIPfb_WoA DIALOG ON RACE WITH CLINTON : CIRCULAR LOGIC

    Listen. I know that solving the problem of race is a goal of monopolistic government.

    But there are those of us who want to solve the problem of monopolistic government even if it doesn’t solve the problem of race.

    The difference between these two factors is only whether the people in government think their goal is of greater priority than the goal of those of us whose priority is freedom from monopolistic government.

    Race is a problem only because of government.

    ALthough, since most social problems are caused by government prohibiting natural economic and social behavior to play out through voluntary exchange, the fact that government tries to fix the problem it creates is both illogical and impossible.

    The way to solve the race problem is to eliminate race from government, and hopefully to eliminate government as we currently understand it: a territorial monopoly that uses violence at the whim of a predatory bureaucracy.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kwlEIPfb_Wo&list=TL2UE0Zb0nryc

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 12:00:00 UTC

  • TO RETURN CARBON LEVELS TO PRE-INDUSTRIAL LEVELS WITHOUT THE NEED FOR GOVERNMENT

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpTHi7O66pIHOW TO RETURN CARBON LEVELS TO PRE-INDUSTRIAL LEVELS WITHOUT THE NEED FOR GOVERNMENT TAX SCHEMES, OR THE REDUCTION OF CONSUMPTION?

    This is how. The socialists are always wrong.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 10:41:00 UTC

  • CUTE “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy”

    CUTE

    “A language is a dialect with an army and a navy”

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 10:06:00 UTC

  • LESSONS ON ANTI-KEYNESIANISM FROM BENOIT MANDELBROT Keynesian noise is not signa

    LESSONS ON ANTI-KEYNESIANISM FROM BENOIT MANDELBROT

    Keynesian noise is not signal. It is just a selection bias that favors Leftist Dunning Kruegerists like Krugman, DeLong, Stiglitz and Thoma.

    LESSON FROM MILITARY HISTORIANS?

    All our economic data is noise representing the spread of anglo-american law by violence – and it’s entirely reversible.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 08:35:00 UTC

  • NOT THAT I REALLY LIKE METAPHYSICS But in my quest for demarcation between scien

    NOT THAT I REALLY LIKE METAPHYSICS

    But in my quest for demarcation between science and logic: is there any argument for existence independent of time, or is any representation of real world phenomenon time-dependent?

    I mean, logic is not time dependent, and by definition represents states to which we add time and measure change.

    We cannot perceive the long or short without altering time. THis is the value of high speed photography which reduces the unobservable to the observable, and measurement, which reduces the unobservable to analogy.

    Thanks

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 08:00:00 UTC

  • THE MOST SERIOUS COGNITIVE BIAS? It depends on the problem we’re discussing. Pol

    THE MOST SERIOUS COGNITIVE BIAS?

    It depends on the problem we’re discussing.

    Politically, it’s the vanity of the presumption of knowledge:

    a) Projection bias: The tendency to unconsciously assume that others share the same or similar thoughts, beliefs, values, or positions.

    b) False consensus effect: The tendency for people to overestimate the degree to which others agree with them.

    c) Bandwagon effect: The tendency to do (or believe) things because many other people do (or believe) the same. Related to groupthink and herd behaviour.

    d) Confusing Economic and political truth with: preference, morality, signaling, reproductive organization, and reproductive strategy – (That’s all it is.)

    The only property of politics that is ‘true’ is that which is necessity in achieving the goals set forth by assumptions. And the goals set forth can mature with both short or long term consequences.

    Economic opportunity determines productive structure, which determines property rights and formal institutions, which determines reproductive structure – and norms that evolve are a trailing indicator.

    You can choose or not choose, to adopt guns germs and steel. But you cannot choose what happens if you do not adopt them.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 07:30:00 UTC

  • THE RATE OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE DETERMINES THE VALUE OF DIFFERENT MODELS OF THE

    THE RATE OF TECHNOLOGICAL CHANGE DETERMINES THE VALUE OF DIFFERENT MODELS OF THE STATE

    The totalitarian system, whether it’s the military or the communist system, is very useful for doing very simple things: fighting wars, imposing education, imposing some system of property rights, and building infrastructure. These are processes of execution, not of invention, research and development in consumer goods. But the totalitarian system cannot improve affairs when there is no understanding of what it must to to approve affairs. The totalitarian system cannot administrate what it does not understand, and it can only understand what is simple and preexisting.

    The individualist system is superior for invention. It improves affairs. It is scientific not ideological, because science is simply trial and error. For this reason the individualist model is superior when you do not know what to do, because the resource which we call technological knowledge, has been exploited into applications that are beyond the grasp of any group of individuals.

    If your civilization ‘falls behind’ or becomes ‘calcified by bureaucracy’ then totalitarianism (or revolution) are useful tools for fixing it. But individualism will always out-innovate totalitarianism because it places no prior (input based) constraint on the individual actors in the population.

    We tend to think in terms of a mixed economy in which the state should focus on execution while the private sector focuses on invention. But our government is not constructed to facilitate this behavior. Its incentives are as Hoppe has shown, to consume cultural, civic, and resource capital as fast as possible in order to maintain power.

    This doesn’t mean it’s not POSSIBLE to create a mixed government. It’s just not possible to do so under representative democratic republicanism in a heterogeneous polity where each generation possesses the illusion of their own genius, instead of possessing the wisdom that they are members of a cycle reacting to a chain of prior cycles, and that their preferences, beliefs and attitudes, are predictable.

    It’s the technology that isn’t predictable.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 06:59:00 UTC

  • HOUSE I”m a pretty dedicated fashion nerd. So, how did I miss iCTZN? Great stuff

    http://www.ictzn.com/FASHION HOUSE

    I”m a pretty dedicated fashion nerd. So, how did I miss iCTZN?

    Great stuff.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-21 05:08:00 UTC

  • WE DON”T NEED IMMIGRANTS Why should we add immigrants so that we can pay the eld

    http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/immigration/10185342/Britain-needs-millions-more-immigrants-to-reduce-strain-of-ageing-population.htmlNO WE DON”T NEED IMMIGRANTS

    Why should we add immigrants so that we can pay the elderly below-subsistence wages, instead of keeping the lot of them in the work force, as well as the young in the work force, and driving up wages?

    Compete for rare intellectual talent. But labor is little value unless its scarce.

    Source date (UTC): 2013-07-20 16:35:00 UTC