DIFFERENT MESSAGES FOR DIFFERENT AGENCY
by Noah J Revoy
Different messages for different minds.
Anglo = high Agency (motivation comes from the internal)
Continental = lower Agency (motivation comes from the external)
Once internal motivation is mastered we get less benefit from external motivators.
Then we focus on getting gains by refining our understanding of what to do with our motivation.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:57:00 UTC
“Your Conservatism changes to Propertarianism once your country is stolen from you by the use of lies.”
–Serg Gio
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:55:00 UTC
WHAT ARE THE LEGIT CRITS OF PROP? (One More Time!!!)
—“Curt: honest question: What are the faults/weaknesses to propertarianism? I am a supporter but no human system is perfect and would like to know that you have thought out how to beat your own plan and what are the counters to slow or stop those from happening. Keep up the good work. Thanks if you respond.”—
Um. I publish legit criticisms all the time. There are a few.
They are all reducible to:
1. Its big, complex, deep, and hard to learn. It is. The more I undrestand it myself, the more I understand that this scale of thing has only happened three other times in history. But people want something simple-stupid like libertarianism or progressivism. It’s not an ideology. it’s the completion of the scientific method, it’s application to all human thought, embodiment in the law, and means of restoring our civilization.
2. People want a political ideology, religion, or secular religion (philosophy) and prop is simply science and law, with ADVICE on religion and secular religion.
3. Jewish, christian, islamic religion do not come off very well, and I have not found a way to accommodate christian mysticism.
4. Everyone wants a monopoly (religion, authoritarianism, fascism, anarchism) when we must use each of these components in every society – we cannot have a monopoly on any of them. People want me to take a stand on THEIR preferred way of organizing society – i use all of them.
5. I suggest a few methods of governing across various peoples and various conditions with the law being the only constant. People want me to take a stand on THEIR preferred order. I use what is required.
6. I am an unabashed elitist working in favor of my people, but other than knowing what is good for my people, I do not consider their understanding of the world very valuable. Only the set of demands they have, not their way of satisfying them. ( I do not claim to be a good, a moral, or decent person or anything of the sort, I only claim I am correct. God knows I’ve made the same mistakes everyone else has. )
As far as I know there are no extant criticisms of the work itself and it will be extremely unlikely such things will arise other than in nuances. This is revolutionary and once you understand it your life will be changed forever.
THE COMMON LEGIT CRITS
… are listed in Section 3 Here:
https://www.facebook.com/curt.doolittle/posts/10156982914672264
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:54:00 UTC
MORE “METAPHYSICS IS JUST FICTION”
I am not sure a discipline called philosophy exists any longer, just as I am not sure a discipline of theology exists any longer, other than as fictionalisms.
Both theology and philosophy are simply statements of limited ability due to ignorance. While useful in their time, I can think of no reason to use them today other than to engage in deception, and I have found no argument put before me that is not an attempt to engage in deception.
—“That’s because you presume an epistemic objectivity of science that isn’t inherent to its methods. You’ve, in the words of Dan Dennett, “take your philosophical baggage onboard” without realizing. As far back as Plato even, it has been understood by some that empirical methodology is limited in scope in terms of what kind of knowledge it can produce.
Cognitive science could get as advanced as you like, perhaps even building minds which we can observe via phenomenological verification, but that wouldn’t change anything, because all scientific findings would be couched within the methodology. ….. As I said note, if you’re more empirically minded, temperament-wise, then none of that will probably interest you, as your concerns are pragmatic, and the differences that those who have a more abstract or balanced temperament are things you either don’t notice, or disdain.”—-
—“… the method….”—
The only methodology in science is testimony. That is the lesson of the 20th century. The rest consists of particular attempts to demonstrate that one performed due diligence prior to testimony.
We run ideas thru a sequence of markets(competitions), and they survive or they dont. We are very close now to coherence (consistency) across all disciplines (which is what my work consists of: the completion of the scientific method – due diligence necessary for testimony – and we are left with why, if coherence is possible (operational prose) and fictions are possible (models that assist us in free associations[ideation]) then there is no such thing as metaphysics, only fictions that assist us in either entertainment or ideation that might somehow fit into coherence.
There is no reason why (which is the correct argument for you to put forward) why networks of meaning (not truth) should not be constructed (fictions) for the purpose of either simplifying, problem solving, or expanding opportunities for investigation. That is very different from claiming such fictions ‘exist’ or are somehow other than fictions for the purpose of opportunity generation, entertainment, sedation, escape, and self and other deception.
—“That’s because you presume an epistemic objectivity of science that isn’t inherent to its methods”—
Actually I don’t. I simply test whether something is testifiable or not (knowledge exists sufficient to make a truth claim) and whether there is malincentive (the equivalent of ‘criminal’ ). And if one makes a truth claim that cannot be made, in support of an incentive to engage in falsehood, I just apply the law: protect others from fraud.
—“…. pragmatic…”–
Again. This is not an argument. The assertion stands that there exist only two or three disciplines: physical science, cognitive science, and language (grammars), and that every instance of a thing called metaphysics that I can find consists of fictionalisms for the purpose of opportunity generation, entertainment, sedation, escape, and self or other deception.
None.
Worse, it is under this pretense that metaphysics is other than fiction, that occult, theology, pseudoscience, idealism, sophism, ignorance, error, bias, wishful thinking, suggestion, obscurantism, loading and framing, the fictionalisms and deceits are justified.
If you can generate an example that survives the above criteria of falsification it would be helpful, since as far as I know – none exist – or can.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:36:00 UTC
Continental: inspire more than educate – as if in church. vs Anglo: educate more than inspire – as if in court.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:18:00 UTC
CONTINENTAL VS ANGLO
Continental philosophy and literature remains fundamentally, theological (even today), and quite unlike anglo, which remains legal-scientific.
***Continental literature is meant to inspire more than educate – as if in church. Anglo literature is meant to educate more than inspire – as if in court.***
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:17:00 UTC
Evola continued the european tradition of continental philosophy and literature, which remains, fundamentally, theological (even today), and quite unlike anglo (legal-scientific). It is meant to inspire more than educate – as if in church. Anglo literature is meant to educate more than inspire – as if in court.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 09:16:00 UTC
Your ‘libertarianism’ changes rapidly once you have daughters. Your progressivism changes once you have to support a family. Your conservatism doesn’t change with daughters or families, or enterprises or nations.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 08:56:00 UTC
Language: a stream of continuous recursive disambiguation resulting in one or more transactions, resulting suggestion at a minimum, a contract for meaning at a on average and due diligence against error, bias, and deceit at a maximum.
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 08:50:00 UTC
—“Metaphysics. The art of obfuscating the obvious for 3,500 years.”—Noah J Revoy
Source date (UTC): 2019-02-14 08:41:00 UTC