Source: Facebook

  • MARKERS AND A HOODIE? I think… I need to go buy myself some markers and a hood

    MARKERS AND A HOODIE?

    I think… I need to go buy myself some markers and a hoodie, ’cause now I have a personal mission that involves beer and stealing around in the dark making mischief.

    (awesome)

    🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-06 09:38:00 UTC

  • WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND POSTMODERNISM? CHRISTIANS (conse

    WHAT IS THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN CHRISTIANITY AND POSTMODERNISM?

    CHRISTIANS (conservatives) keep their hands out of your pockets, and demand you behave ethically and morally in public – AND POSTMODERNISTS (liberals) put their hands into your pockets and that is their only demand.

    That appears to be the only difference.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-06 09:36:00 UTC

  • FREUD IS WEARING A SLIP? 🙂 What is it called when you say one thing and mean an

    FREUD IS WEARING A SLIP? 🙂

    What is it called when you say one thing and mean another?

    1) A slip of the tongue (parapraxis) where a word is accidentally replaced by another. In a nervous setting, a slip of the tongue can be called a Freudian Slip.

    2) It can also be innuendo, whereby ones says something which is apparently innocent but means something else, usually of a sexual nature.

    3) It can be metaphor, where a difficult idea is expressed in simple or picturesque terms eg “It’s raining cats and dogs” to mean “Its raining heavily”.

    4) It can be euphemism, where the word(s) used substitute for other words or ideas that are being avoided, for reasons of sensitivity, secrecy, etc.

    5) It can be hyperbole, (exaggeration) where the truth is stretched for emphasis eg “I’ve told you a million times not to do that” when you mean “I’ve told you many times”

    6) It can be metonym, where a simple idea is used to represent a larger concept eg the White House to represent the US presidency.

    7) It can be slang. A Londoner might say “Where’s my trouble and strife” when he means “Where’s my wife”

    8) It can be a malapropism where a word is accidentally replaced by a similar sounding one eg “I can say without fear of contraception..” instead of “I can say without fear of contradiction..”

    9) It can be a spoonerism, where the initial letters of two words are swapped eg saying “Its roaring with pain” instead of “Its pouring with rain”

    10) If it is intentional, is called deceit, lying, misleading, mendacity.

    At least for this particular writer and speaker, malapropism is an almost guaranteed daily occurrence.

    When talking quickly I often skip words, to confusing and sometimes humorous effect.

    I am really conscious of my tendency to make freudian slips so I’m careful when I’m nervous.

    I intentionally use hyperbole because it is the only access to decent humor available to me. :0

    THANKS TO ANSWERS.COM FOR THIS CONTRIBUTION TO HUMOR


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-05 14:40:00 UTC

  • WE TRADE INTERPERSONAL CORRUPTION … We trade interpersonal corruption, which i

    WE TRADE INTERPERSONAL CORRUPTION …

    We trade interpersonal corruption, which is endemic in the rest of the world, for systemic corruption of organizations in the western world.

    I am still struggling a bit to be sure that I understand these processes. But certainly coercion exists equally in these societies. The question is the transfer of transaction costs from individuals to organizations. It is far easier and cheaper for us to interact with one another. But it appears it is equally complicated for the organizations that we belong to (political parties) to resolve high friction differences.

    Economic productivity then, is gained by the process of pressing free riding and rent seeking and that form of involuntary transfer that we call price competition from a property of personal relations, both into the market where it is not visible and it is morally sanctioned, but also, into the political system.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-05 11:16:00 UTC

  • A FORK IN IT. 🙂 I’ve pretty much completed Aristocratic Philosophy, articulated

    http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=stick+a+fork+in+itSTICK A FORK IN IT. 🙂

    I’ve pretty much completed Aristocratic Philosophy, articulated as Propertariansm. And I’m working now, largely on application of the theory to all topics in political discourse – something which I’ve taken from Mises and Rothbard’s organizations of the topics in their books. One short chapter per topic.

    Now, it’ll become clear pretty quickly that I’ve stuck a permanent, irremovable fork in Rothbardian ethics. I’m not sure yet how to address conservatives and classical liberals, or how long it will take, before, if at all, it becomes clear that I’ve provided them with a rationally articulated rhetorical framework that makes their ideas defensible – so that they don’t have to rely on history, religious analogy and unarticulated morality as arguments. If I’m lucky, I will have, by invalidating rothbardian ethics, and articulating aristocratic ethics, provided the twin means of intellectually uniting the libertarian, conservative, and classical liberal movements.

    What I didn’t expect was to stick a fork in Feminism. But I’ve absolutely done it. Not in the sense that women shouldn’t have equal property rights. But in the sense that the feminine social order of equalitarianism is supposedly ‘superior’ to the male order of individual property: meritocratic, aristocratic, egalitarianism.

    I think I will just devote a single chapter to it in my book on Propertarianism. And, if more is necessary, write something specifically to address feminism as a shorter work later on. Even though it doesn’t interest me very much.

    I’ve always planned two books: the first analytical and intellectual, the second narrative and inspirational. I have outlined the second book twice. And it is much easier to work on than the current one. It is not problem solving, but communication. Not analysis but art.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-05 03:20:00 UTC

  • CELEBRATION! We have left the building for the night. We finished the last sprin

    CELEBRATION!

    We have left the building for the night.

    We finished the last sprint on the new UI features, and the pricing system, and have started on the incredibly complex task of resource management – a difficult problem that all Agencies and Consultancies face. And we have absolutely the best solution on the market – if you have to manage a lot of TRAFFIC in production work. And that’s before we even talk about having tickets, work orders, production, agile and WBS all in the same product .

    So we are going to celebrate.

    Actually, I had to tell the guys that no, I would not fly to Istanbul tonight and come back in tatters on Monday. We deserve a celebration. But my body can’t take that kind of insanity right now. I called them on age. These guys are almost half my age. So I asked for mercy. 🙂

    They were merciful but only to the extent that we must plan a party trip to L’viv.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-03 13:03:00 UTC

  • CICERO 55bc?) “The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, p

    CICERO 55bc?)

    “The budget should be balanced, the treasury should be refilled, public debt should be reduced, the arrogance of officialdom should be tempered and controlled, and the assistance to foreign lands should be curtailed – lest rome become bankrupt. People must again learn to work, instead of living on public assistance.”

    Not legit at all:

    The quote actually originated in A Pillar of Iron (1965), Taylor Caldwell’s fictionalized account of the life of the senator, on page 483.

    But I love this nonsense anyway. 🙂


    Source date (UTC): 2013-04-01 14:32:00 UTC

  • FINISHED MY WORK ON RORTY. (eh.) His criticism of the metaphysical project is ac

    FINISHED MY WORK ON RORTY. (eh.)

    His criticism of the metaphysical project is accurate. His definition of truth as ‘whatever we agree upon’ is just a justification for postmodern verbal deception. It’s a justification not a description.

    Waste of time.

    Sigh.

    As for political philosophy, we are back to the philosophy of science, but where instead of testing hypotheses against the regular patterns of the physical universe, we are testing hypotheses against the willingness to enter voluntary exchanges.

    Of course, the universe has a fairly constant periodicity at the newtonian scale of our human actions (albeit at much faster and slower, larger and smaller, that’s something else entirely). But human beings exhibit any number of periodic patterns due to age, generation, state of current knowledge, arrangement of current resources, and arrangement of humans into complex webs of production that we call a division of labor, all of which is signalled by prices made possible by the commensurability of money, subject to flocking and swarming, and external shocks from the physical world.

    Just as we hypothesize that the universe expands and contracts, so does our civilization, as we gain new knowledge of how to more effectively extract calories from the world’s resources, then via fertility, consume the incremental value of that knowledge.

    Meanwhile we school like fish to national opportunities, until they too are exhausted via boom and bust. And within that boom and bust the constant signaling necessary for mating and reproduction take place giving rise to subtle differences in fashion and aesthetics, which are the micro-applications of those advances in our capture of calories from the material world.

    Truth is a description of actions that if repeated, reproduce previous results among categories with a similar periodicity. This is somewhat problematic because first, periodicity becomes extremely complicated outside of the newtonian physical world, or, among humans, outside of the family.

    Second because production cycles and therefore all the categories of measurement, randomly fall apart and then are recreated in response to changing demand on one and and availability of solutions on the other.

    Truth is not what we agree it is. Ambitions may be whatever we agree upon. Even if those ambitions are metaphorically, a-rationally or irrationally stated.

    It may be true that we can chant false things often enough that people will for some time believe them long enough to implement som policy or other. In fact, that is what happens most of the time. That is the purpose of the progressive-postmodern program.

    But truth in the physical world and truth in the world of human action are different in the sense that the actions needed to replicate something in the physical world will remain constant, and actions needed to replicate something in the human world will not remain constant.

    In either case, any true statement is a statement about the set of actions, not about the thing or process itself (which doesn’t exist as a set of conditions except as a collection of statements or symbols or stimuli). Most confusion is caused by this confusion. We can make statements. We can test these statements.These statements under test, will either reproduce prior results (true) or not (false), or be inconclusive (not true, not false, but simply non logical).

    True statements are true by means of analogies constructed of abstract categories we call actions – and they are indeed categories. And these statements are just statements. They are statements that if imitated, produce consistent results each time that they are tested. And without additional information they will not change. But since we are always subject to new information, they are constantly open to possible change, even if that change is largely only an increase in the detail provided by smaller and larger, or faster and slower scales.

    Humans must be able to reduce conceptual analogies to something that can be processed by the brain in two or three seconds. Most of our work is to produce some means by which we create causal categories that can be submitted to our senses in a form that we can associate with other associations in three seconds or less.

    Lots of associative power. Short periodicity for processing that much information.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-03-31 13:20:00 UTC

  • LIBERTARIANISM Etymology. History. Konkin’s History of the Libertarian Movement.

    LIBERTARIANISM

    Etymology. History. Konkin’s History of the Libertarian Movement.

    1 – One is a libertarian by sentiment.

    2 – Libertarians hold either this sentiment or a moral bias, or a political bias that supports this sentiment. Or a philosophical position that supports this sentiment.

    3 – Classical liberalism, the american tradition, constitutionalism and the cult of the founding fathers all profess liberty, they are therefore libertarian, but the philosophy is classical liberalism not libertarianism.

    4 – Libertarianism is an articulated philosophy written by rothbard as a means of providing an argumentative ethical response to socialism and postmodernism.

    5 – Libertarianism is an ideology that makes use of rothbard’s arguments, but also which is inspirationally argued on moral grounds rather than rhetorically defended.

    6 – Anarcho capitalism is an extension of rothbardian libertarianism to expressly include Austrian economics, and has greater emphasis on institutions (via hoppe and block) and less on moral or abstract ethical arguments (rothbard).

    In colloquial language libertarianism is used imprecisely, instead of the correct ‘libertarian’ to refer to all libertarian biases, preferences, ideologies and philosophy,whether they be sentimental classical liberal, libertarian, liertarianism, or anarcho capitalism, or some other variation such as objectivism.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-03-31 11:40:00 UTC

  • CAN ANYONE EDIT MY LATIN? “Proprietas est scriptura nobilitate, violentia est os

    CAN ANYONE EDIT MY LATIN?

    “Proprietas est scriptura nobilitate, violentia est os atramentum”

    “Property is the scripture of nobility, and violence is its ink”

    It’s not right. “os” isn’t right I don’t think.


    Source date (UTC): 2013-03-31 11:15:00 UTC